Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/addressofstateirOOstatrich 


i*» 


A 13  ]J  K  K  S  S 


STATE  IRRIGATION  COMMITTEE 


Fresno  and  Riverside  Irrigation  Conventions 


asd  to  the 


AXT^I-RIPARIAN    V^O-^I  KR.^ 


or  CALIFORNIA. 


IIITH  OPmiONS  OF  THE  PRESS. 


!,---.( 


ADDRKSS 


STATE  IRRIGATION  COMMITTEE 


Fresno  and  Riverside  Irrigation  Conventions 


AND  TO  THE 


ANTI=RIP^ARIAN    VOTERS 


OF  CALIFORNIA. 


^,        ^    *  ■»  n 


1886. 


Main  Lib. 
Afidc.  Deyt. 


ADDEESS 


Members  of  the  Riverside  and  Fresno  Irrigation 
Conventions. 


The  undersigned,  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irri- 
gation Convention,  desire  to  submit  a  statement  of  their 
action  to  the  constituents  of  the  above  Conventions,  and  to 
all  people  who  have  an  interest  in  the  encouragement  of  ir- 
rigation. 

This  committee  was  directed  to  frame  bills  for  laws  to  be 
acted  on  by  the  Legislature.  These  were  to  remedy  the 
evils  of  existing  laws  relating  to  the  appropriation  of  water, 
and  were  intended  to  place  irrigation  amongst  the  perma- 
nent policies  of  the  State.  To  the  support  of  these  pro- 
posed legal  reforms  we  sought  to  bring  an  intelligent  public 
opinion,  fully  aroused  to  the  importance  of  this  question  of 
questions.  The  English  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian 
ownership  is  repugnant  and  inapplicable  to  the  physical 
conditions  of  this  State,  because  it  permits  no  use  of  water 
outside  the  banks  of  a  stream,  unless  by  assent  of  the  abut- 
ting owner.  As  the  waters  are  in  volume  far  beyond  the 
possibility  of  use  by  him  for  any  purpose,  this  doctrine 
permits  him  to  misrule  them  to  waste  in  the  sea,  while  lands 
lie  virgin  which  they  would  rouse  to  such  fruitfulness  that  a 
less  acreage  than  elsewhere  in  the  whole  world  would  sup- 
port a  family  in  affluence  without  extreme  toil. 

The  bills  drawn  by  this  committee  were  introduced  in 
both  branches  of  the  Legislature,  and  underwent  refine- 
ment and  revision  in  the  committees  of  that  body. 


379962 


IV 

Meantime  the  intelligent  press  of  the  Stato,  alive  to  the 
justice  of  our  cause,  appreciating  the  necessity  of  legislation 
to  put  statute  and  natural  law  in  harmony,  came  to  our 
y'  assistance.  The  leading  journals  of  San  Francisco  realizing 
that  the  highest  interests  of  that  city  impinge  upon  irriga- 
tion, made  reiterated  appeals  to  the  Legislature  in  our 
favor,  while  the  newspapers  of  the  interior,  with  inconsider- 
able exceptions,  aligned  with  us  and  gave  gallant  battle  for 
our  propositions. 

These  united  efforts  in  a  great  and  just  cause  disclosed  to 
the  Legislature  and  the  people  its  relation  to  the  prosperity 
of  the  whole  State,  and  our  reform  was  proved  to  be  of 
general  utility  and  application,  and  not  a  local  issue  ex- 
hausting its  benefits  in  a  pent  up  section.  Confidence  in 
the  merit  and  necessity  of  our  projected  legislation  was 
diffused  throughout  the  State,  and  was  reflected  in  memo- 
rials and  petitions  to  the  Legislature. 

Our  thanks  are  due  and  are  hereby  delivered  in  the  name 
of  those  who  represent  to  the  press  of  the  State  for  tlie  ser- 
vice so  gejierously  volunteered  and  so  efficiently  rendered. 
It  brought  us  near  to  success.  The  same  assistance  encour- 
ages a  renewal  of  our  efforts,  with  greater  energy  and .  the 
benefit  of  experience.  Preparation  for  the  future  is  not 
complete  without  the  guidance  afforded  by  the  full  history 
of  what  has  been  done.  We  addressed  the  Legislature  with 
a  review  of  our  case,  illuminated  by  extracts  from  the  press. 
The  sixty  days  session  was  drawing  to  a  close.  The  few 
riparian  owners  who  oppose  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation, 
controlling  a  small  minority  in  the  House,  filibustered  to 
hinder  there  the  passage  of  our  bills,  but,  when  the  sinister 
arts  of  delay  had  exhausted  themselves,  our  measures  passed 
the  House  by  more  than  a  three-fourths  vote,  and  were  sent 
to  the  Senate.  There  we  had  a  two- thirds  vote  ready  to  be 
cast  in  our  favor  if  the  measures  could  be  reached.  The 
influence  of  the  Governor's  views  so  clearly  expressed  in 
our  favor,  and  argued  with  unanswerable  force  in  his  mes- 


sage,  bad  been  continually  at  work  upon  the  better  judg- 
ment of  the  Upper  House.  But  there  again  filibustering 
and  all  the  resources  of  Parliamentary  impediment  were 
against  us,  and  the  bills  failed. 

The  mistaken  men,  who  were  the  agents  of  this  misfor- 
tune to  Calif  of  nia,  should  be  marked,  and  future  confidence 
be  withheld  from  them  when  they  ask  the  votes  of  irrigators 
to  elevate  them  to  office.  Let  them  resort  to  the  riparian- 
ists  for  support.  Let  them  depend  for  future  preferment 
upon  the  men  who  devote  our  lands  to  barrenness  and 
threaten  our  State  with  decay.  Let  them,  at  least  until  our 
rights  are  entrenched  in  the  harmonies  of  law,  human  and 
divine,  suffer  the  consequences  of  their  malice  or  their 
mistake. 

Here  ends  the  history  of  what  has  been  done.  Here  the 
account  of  our  stewardship  is  rendered. 

Now  we  turn  to  the  future.  We  appeal  from  a  filibuster- 
ing minority  of  the  Senate  to  the  great  people  whose  wishes 
are  soon  to  be  reflected  in  the  election  of  a  new  Legislature. 
We  would  have  them  realize  the  necessity  of  irrigation. 
The  benefits  it  has  already  showered  upon  the  State  are  in- 
estimable, and  the  blessings  yet  to  come  from  the  water  are 
innumerable. 

Great  areas  are  already  made  fruitful,  and  enterprising 
thousands  under  the  protection  of  the  doctrine  of  appropria- 
tion produce  a  generous  livelihood  for  themselves  and  a 
groat  surplus  for  export,  which  adds  to  the  common  wealth. 
Millions  of  dollars  are  invested  in  canals  and  ditches  prim- 
arily devoted  to  irrigation,  while  the  systems  which  were 
built  for  hydraulic  mining  debouch  upon  plains  that  are 
athirst,  and  used  for  irrigation  will  create  greater  wealth 
than  gilded  the  dreams  of  their  projectors. 

But  the  acreage  already  subjected  to  irrigation  is  insig- 
nificant compared  with  the  desert  unreclaimed.  Within 
the  rim  of  our  great  interior  valleys  there  are  64,000,000 
•acres,  an  area  equal  to  that  of  Maine,  New  Hampshire, 


v^ 


v/ 


VI 

"Vermont,  Massachusetts,  Khode  Island,   Connecticut,  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  combined.     Yet  those  States  have  a 
population   of  13,427,270!     A  population  which  supports 
the  three  imperial  trade  centres  of  the  country — Boston, 
New  York  and  Philadelphia,  besides  scores  of  local  points 
for  the  concentration  and  distribution  of  the  immense  com- 
merce generated  in  the  necessities  and  the  energies  of  those 
millions  of  people.     Going   abroad  for   comparison,    this 
habitable   area  in   California,   naturally  tributary  to  San 
Francisco,  is  one   and   a   fourth   times   the   size  of  Great 
Britain,  with  her  30,000,000  of  people.     Yet   our   valleys 
have  only   284,000  souls,  and  our  own  whole  area  only  6 J 
persons  to  the  square  mile !     The  whole  Atlantic  slope  has 
22.4  to  the  square  mile  ;  the  Merrimac  Valley  has  92.6  ;  the 
Connecticut  Valley,  56.5  ;  the  Valley  of  the  Hudson,  173 
the  basin  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  33  ;  the  Ontario  basin,  78.2 
that  of  Lake  Erie,  89.6;  the  Valley  of  the  Miami,  109.67 
while  the  Valleys  of  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  have 
only  4.9  to  the  square  mile! 

To  continue  the  suggestive  comparison:  if  our  two  great 
valleys  were  as  densely  peopled  as  the  basin  of  the  St. 
Lawrence,  their  population  would  be  1,856,000 ;  if  equal  to 
the  New  England  coast,  they  would  have  3,538,000  ;  if  equal 
to  the  Ontario  basin,  4,523,000 ;  if  equal  to  the  Valley  of 
the  Delaware,  10,208,000.  To  sum  up:  The  present  unoc- 
cupied area  of  these  valleys  should  support  11,000,000  of 
people,  a  population  which  would  make  San  Francisco  the 
most  desirable  business  city  in  the  world,  and  the  mart  of 
an  immense  commerce,  as  varied  in  the  products  which 
create  it  as  the  globe-gleaned  trade  of  London. 

These  results  can  only  be  secured  by  irrigation.  By  its 
aid  only  can  crops  be  raised  at  all  in  a  large  part  of  the 
area  just  described,  because  of  the  light  rainfall  and  natural 
dryness  of  the  climate  in  the  desert  half  of  the  State.  While 
irrigation  is  needed  to  make  returns  from  the  soil  sure 
where  a  fickle  rainfall  now  enables  a  full  crop  only  one  year 
in  seven. 


Vll 

All  of  this  area  is  capable  of  high  farming.  It  will  pro- 
duce a  commercial  surplus  of  every  necessity,  luxury  and 
delicacy  listed  in  the  food  supply  that  grows  outside  the 
tropics.  Noble  mountains  rise  on  either  side  of  those 
valleys,  clad  with  timber  which  shelters  the  cool  sources  of 
the  waters  for  irrigation.  The  seashore  is  a  short  journey 
distant.  Thermal  springs  pour  out  their  medicinal  waters 
near  at  hand,  and  here  lies  a  richer  soil  than  Belgium  has, 
under  kinder  skies  than  Italy  can  boast.  The  thought  is 
insufferable  that  uncongenial  law  shall  permit  human  sel- 
fishness to  forbid  the  bans  between  these  gifts  of  God, 
and  by  keeping  land  and  water  wastefully  apart  deny  the 
world  the  benefits  and  blessings  of  their  union. 

The  streams  which  traverse  these  valleys  have  their 
heads  in  perpetual  snow.  Eiparian  ownership  denies  their 
flow  to  the  thirsty  earth  and  condemns  it  to  evaporation 
and  emission  in  the  thankless  sea. 

What  is  the  law,  and  what  ought  it  to  be?  These  are  the 
questions  to  be  settled.  Shall  the  streams  be  legally  open 
to  appropriation,  or  shall  the  law  of  riparian  ownership 
lock  the  water  within  the  banks?  Shall  the  flow  be  useful  or 
useless?  The  intelligence  and  enterprise  of  the  State  have 
already  answered  these  questions:  ''The  water  shall  be 
for  irrigation."  This  answer  is  only  the  reflection  ^of  the 
first  impulse  of  our  pioneers,  who  appropriated  to  useful 
purposes  the  waters  they  found  wasting.  This  custom  has 
been  projected  to  the  comprehensive  systems  that  are  now 
making  parts  of  this  wilderness  to  blossom,  and  there  even 
women  to-day  guard  the  gates  through  which  flow  the  very 
waters  of  life  that  support  the  vine  and  fig  tree  under  which 
their  children  play. 

The  efforts  of  the  last  two  years  have  recruited  the  ranks  ^ 
of  irrigators,  until  we  are  an  army.    The  force  is  ready  now 
for  organization,  which  should  be   made  in  all  interested 
localities.     Organization  is  power.    We  must  now  make  our 
force  effective  in  the  politics  of  the  State,  since  in  politics 


VIU 

the  Legislature  to  which  we  appeal,  is  generated.  We  must 
demonstrate  the  fact  that  there  are  x^olitical  triumphs 
greater  than  the  conquest  of  spoils,  and  this  is  to  be  done 
by  going  unitedly  into  politics  to  stay  until  our  rights  are 

/  secured.  The  counties  vitally  interested  in  irrigation  cast 
upwards  of  40,000  votes.  They  control  elections,  for  narrow 
pluralities  between  parties  are  of  late  years  the  rule  in  Cali- 
fornia. In  our  First  Congressional  District  in  1884,  a  plur- 
ality of  145  elected  in  a  total  vote  of  83,103.  In  the  Second 
District  the  winning  plurality  was  119  in  a  vote  of  37,073. 
In  the  Sixth  District  it  was  409,  in  a  vote  of  35,444.    So  let 

\/  no  irrigator  despair  that  his  vote  counts  so  little.  To  get 
the  full  benefit  of  our  strength,  this  committee  advises  that 
irrigation  anti-riparian  clubs  be  formed  in  every  town  and 
county  throughout  the  State,  to  membership  in  which 
every  one,  no  matter  what  his  occupation,  shall  be  eligible, 
provided  he  faithfully  opposes  riparian  monopoly  of  water 
and  favors  appropriation  for  irrigation,  and  the  measures 
referred  by  us  to  the  last  Legislature.  These  clubs  should 
form  at  once.  *  Never  mind  if  a  club  be  few  in  number.  Its 
strength  is  its  righteousness  of  purpose,  and  the  aggregate 
membership  when  it  keeps  step  all  over  the  State  will  shake 

^  the  foundation  of  parties,  and  these  clubs  can  say  who  shall 
be  Governor,  Attorney-General  and  Judges  of  our  Supreme 
and  Superior  Courts,  and  who  shall,  sit  in  the  Legislature. 
In  addition  to  the  construction  of  this  club  organization, 
in  the  further  performance  of  our  duty,  we  hereby  call  and 
appoint 

A  STATE  CONVENTION 

Composed  of  all  who  favor  the  platform  and  objects  of  the 
Fresno  Convention  of  Irrigators,  and  support  the  measures 
proposed  to  the  Legislature  by  this  organization.  This 
Convention  will  meet  in  San  Francisco  on  Thursday,  the 
20th  day  of  May,  1886,  at  11  o'clock  A.  M.  We  urgently 
^  request  every  Club  organized  under  this  call  to  delegate  as 
many  as  can  come  to  take  part  in  this  Convention,  and  it  is 


IX 

distinctly  understood  that  participation  therein  is  not  the 
right  or  privilege  of  supporters  of  riparian  ownership. 

When  assembled  the  Convention  will  effect  a  permanent 
central  organization,  to  perfect  the  scheme  of  laws  already 
prepared  by  this  Committee,  and  urge  them  to  success  in 
the  next  Legislature  ;  also  to  formulate  a  plan  of  action  to 
be  followed  in  the  coming  political  campaign,  by  which  our 
strength  shall  be  felt  at  every  precinct  in  the  State,  and  the 
value  of  our  supporters  demonstrated  to  every  candidate 
for  office.  Through  this  organization  it  is  proposed  to  in- 
form both  parties  that  we  know  no  politics  but  irrigation, 
and  that  our  battlefield  is  on  the  irrigable  plains  upon 
which  the  future  of  California  is  to  be  exploited. 

J.  De  Barth  Shoeb,  J.  F.  Whaeton, 

W.  S.  Green,  E.  Hudnut, 

H.  S.  Dixon,  L.  B.  Ruggles, 

E.  H,  Tucker,  D.  K.  Zumwalt, 

L.  M.  Holt,  Executive  Committee. 


ARTICLES  OF  ASSOCIATION^ 


Anti-Riparian  Irrigation  Club. 


Whereas,  The  necessities  of  the  people  of  this  State, 
growing  out  of  our  peculiar  climatic  and  physical  con- 
ditions, require  that  all  the  waters  of  the  State  should  be 
applied  to  beneficial  uses,  and  especially  to  irrigation  ;  and 

Whereas,  It  has  been  the  well-established  custom  and 
usage  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  State  every  since  the  terri- 
tory was  acquired  from  Mexico,  and  long  prior  thereto,  to 
enjoy  and  permit  the  free  appropriation  and  diversion  of 
water  to  all  who  would  apply  it  to  a  beneficial  use  ;  and 

Whereas,  By  virtue  of  such  usage  and  custom,  capital 
and  labor  have  created  out  of  deserts  and  rivers  enormous 
wealth  to  the  State,  and  the  irrigation  interests  have  as- 
sumed gigantic  proportions ;  and 

Whereas,  Several  hundred  thousand  people  are  now  de- 
pendent upon  and  directly  or  indirectly  supported  by  means 
of  irrigation ;  and 

Whereas,  Attempts  are  now  being  made  to  resurrect  the 
English  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  from  the 
grave  to  which  the  will  of  the  people  long  since  consigned 
it,  and  to  impress  it  upon  the  jurisprudence  of  the  State ; 
and 

Whereas,  Such  attempt,  if  successful,  means  the  desola- 
tion of  thousands  of  homes ;  it  means  that  the  desert  shall 
invade  vineyard,  orchard  and  field;  that  the  grape  shall 
parch  upon  the  vine,  the  fruit  wither  on  the  tree,  and  the 
meadow  be  cursed  with  drought;  it  means  that  silence 
shall  fall  upon  our  busy  colonies,  and  their  people  shall  flee 
from  the  thirsty   and  unwatered  lands ;  it  means  that  the 


XI 

cities  built  upon  the  commerce  irrigation  has  created,  shall 
decay,  and  that  in  all  this  region  the  pillars  of  civilization 
shall  fall,  and  unprofitable  flocks  and  herds  shall  graze  the 
scant  herbage  where  once  there  was  a  land  of  corn  and 
wine,  flowing  with  milk  and  honey  ;  and 

Whereas,  If  this  attempt  to  forbid  the  uteful  appropria- 
tion of  water  is  defeated  by  a  righteous  public  opinion 
crystallized  into  law,  the  homes  now  planted  in  the  midst  of 
fruitful  acres  will  remain  the  shelter  of  a  happy  people ,  en- 
riched by  the  productive  soil,  and  irrigation  will  advance 
the  frontier  of  verdure  and  flowers  and  fruits,  until  the 
desert  is  conquested  and  has  exchanged  its  hot  sands  for 
happy  garlands,  its  vagrant  herds  for  valiant  people,  and 
the  blear  plains  will  grow  purple  with  the  vintage  and 
golden  with  the  harvest,  and  the  pleasures  and  profits,  the 
peace  and  plenty  that  come  out  of  the  useful  rivers  will 
make  this  land  the  Promised  Land  to  millions  of  free 
people;  and 

Whereas,  We  have,  then,  on  the  one  hand  the  certainties 
of  agriculture  and  horticulture,  of  profitable  immigration, 
of  surplus  production  for  export  of  articles  universally  de- 
sirable and  necessary,  and  always  in  demand  ;  the  growth 
of  our  cities  and  the  greatness  of  our  State.  On  the  other 
hand  are  thirst  and  famine,  ruin  and  decay,  farms  dis- 
mantled, colonies  abandoned,  cities  subjected  to  dry  rot, 
and  the  State  denied  her  career  by  denying  to  her  people 
their  birthright. 

Whereas,  The  Court  of  highest  resort  of  the  State,  whose 
final  determination  is  conclusive  of  law,  is  divided  upon  the 
question,  and  the  right  of  appropriation  and  irrigation  now 
stands  upon  uncertain  ground;  and 

Whereas,  The  Legislature  has  failed  to  take  measures 
for  the  protection  of  irrigation;  and 

Whereas,  There  are  40,000  voters  in  this  State  ready  and 
anxious  to  fight  and  vote  as  a  unit  for  irrigation;  and 


Xll 


Whereas,  The  safe  and  sure  road  to  a  successful  issue, 
in  the  Courts  and  in  the  Legislature,  is  to  organize,  and  by 
united  and  harmonious  action  control  the  result  of  the 
coming  election — 

Resolved,  Th^t  we,  the  undersigned,  associate  ourselves 
together  under  the  name  of  the  Anti-Kiparian  Irrigation 
Club  of  and  adopt  the  following  By-Laws 

and  Pledge: 


Bf-LAWS   A]^D   PLEDGE. 


AETICLE  I. 


The  purposes  for  which  this  Chib  is  organized,  are — 

1.  To  maintain  that  the  right  of  appropriation  of  water 
for  beneficial  purposes,  is  and  always  has  been,  paramount 
to  any  alleged  rights  of  riparian  owners  in  this  State. 

2.  To  secure  the  adoption  of  an  amendment  to  the  State  y 
Constitution,  declaring  that  the  common  law  of  England  is^ 
not  and  should  not  be  the  rule  of  property,  or  the  rule  of 
decision  in  the  Courts  of  this  State  in  controversies  con- 
cerning the  right  to  appropriate,  divert  and  use  water,  nor 

in  actions  by  or  against  actual  appropriators  of  water  for 
beneficial  purposes;  and  that  priority  of  appropriation  for  a 
beneficial  purpose  determines  the  right  without  regard  to 
the  ownership  of  the  banks  of  a  water-course. 

3.  To  maintain  both  as  a  physical  and  legal  proposition^ 
that  the  conditions  and  necessities  of  the  People  of  this 
State,  and  the  climatic  and  physical  characteristics  of.  the 
State  are,  and  ever  have  been,  such  as  to  render  the  com- 
mon law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  in£»pplicable  here. 

4.  To  secure  the  passage  of  any  and  all  other  amend- 
ments to  the  Constitution  or  Laws  which  will  contribute  to 
establish  the  right  of  irrigation  against  the  riparian  doc- 
trine. 

5.  To  procure  the  election  of  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture who  openly  and  without  qualification,  favor  and  will 
act  upon  the  foregoing  principles,  regardless  of  political 
affiliations. 

6.  To  oppose  through  the  ballot-box,  and  by  every  other  / 
legitimate  means,  the  election  of  any  person  to  office,  execu- 


XIV 


tive,  legislative  or  judicial,  who  is  not  known  to  be  in  full 
and  active  accord  with  every  proposition  contained  in  these 
By-Laws. 

7.  To  obtain  confirmation  by  the  Courts  and  the  Legis- 
lature as  the  law  and  the  fact,  that  the  use  of  the  waters  of 
streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation,  is  a  natural  want  in 
this  State,  and  to  be  preferred  to  all  other  uses. 

ARTICLE  11. 

No  person  who  is  not  in  full  accord  with  the  purpose  and 
principles  contained  in  Article  I  of  these  By-Laws,  shall  be 
qualified  to  become  a  member  of  this  Club. 

Every  person  becoming  a  member  shall  sign  these  By- 
Laws,  and  take  and  subscribe  to  the  following  pledge: 

We,  the  undersigned,  hereby  pledge  ourselves  to  use  all 
honorable  means  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  this  Club,  as 
set  forth  in  the  foregoing  By-Laws;  and  we  hereby  declare 
that  the  principles  therein  set  forth  constitute  the  first  arti- 
cle of  our  political  creed,  and  that  no  candidate  of  any  party 
for  office  shall  receive  our  vote  or  our  support,  unless 
he  is  a  pronounced  believer  and  advocate  of  the  principles 
therein  enumerated. 

ARTICLE  III. 

The  officers  of  this  Club  shall  be  President,  Vice-Presi- 
dent, Secretary  and  Treasurer,  and  their  duties  shall  be 
such  as  are  usually  performed  by  such  officers. 


TO    THEi 


ANTI-RIPARIAN  VOTERS  OF  CALIFORNIA, 


Now  is  the  time  to  organize  for  war  against  Riparianism. 
We  recommend  that  you  immediately  form  Anti-Riparian 
Irrigation  Clubs,  and  adopt  the  accompanying  Articles  and 
By-Laws.  In  them  you  will  find  the  Anti-Riparian  Irriga- 
tion political  creed. 

Begin  to  enroll  in  Clubs  at  once.  You  are  forty  thousand 
strong.  Unite  as  one  man,  speak  with  one  voice,  and  vote 
with  one  accord. 

By  union  you  can  command  as  a  right  what  you  have 
vainly  begged  as  a  favor. 

Organize  and  you  can  have  a  potent  voice  in  the  selection 
of  Judges  and  Legislators.  It  is  within  your  power  to  crush 
the  threatening  evils  of  Riparianism.  Fire  the  hearts  of 
the  people  with  the  justice  of  your  cause.  Show  political 
parties  that  you  have  the  strength  and  the  will  to  enforce 
what  you  demand. 

J.  DeBakth  Shore,  J.  F.  Wharton, 

W.  S.  Green,  R.  Hudnut, 

H.  S.  Dixon,  L.  B.  Ruggles, 

E.  H.  Tucker,  D.  K.  Zumwalt, 

L.  M.  Holt, 

Legislative  Committee  of  the 

State  Irrigation  Convention. 


TO  THE  PUBLIC. 


The  following  is  a  list  of  the  newspapers  in  the  State 
which  have  espoused  the  cause  of  irrigation: 

Alameda  County. 

Alameda  Encinal, 
Alameda  Semi- Weekly  Argus, 
Berkeley  Advocate, 
Brooklyn  Eagle, 
Haywards  Journal, 
Livermore  Valley  Eeview, 
Oakland  ^Inquirer, 
Oakland  Journal  (German), 
Oakland  Sentinel, 
Oakland  Times, 
Oakland  Tribune, 
Pleasanton  Star, 
San  Leandro  Reporter, 
West  Oakland  Sentinel. 

Colusa  County. 

Colusa  Sun, 
Maxwell  Star. 

Contba  Costa. 

(Martinez)  Contra  Costa  Argus, 
(Martinez)  Contra  Costa  Gazette, 
Martinez  Daily  Item. 

Fresno  County. 

Fresno  Expositor, 
Fresno  Republican.  *• 


XVlll 

Humboldt  CorNrr. 

(Eureka)  Humboldt  Standard. 

Inyo  County. 

(Independence)  Inyo  Independent. 

Kern  County. 

(Bakersfield)  Korn  County  Californian, 
(Bakersfield)  Kern  County  Gazette. 

Los  Angeles  County. 

Anaheim  Gazette, 
Los  Angeles  Express, 
Los  Angeles  Herald, 
Los  Angeles  Mirror, 
Los  Angeles  Times, 
(Sabado)  La  Cronica. 
Santa  Ana  Standard, 

Marin  County. 

(San  Eafael)  Marin  Co.  Tocsin. 

Mariposa  County. 
Mariposa  Herald. 

Mendocino  County, 

(Ukiah  City)  Dispatch-Democrat, 

Merced  County. 

Merced  Express, 

Merced  Star, 

(Merced)  San  Joaquin  Valley  Argus. 

Napa  County. 

Napa  Daily  Register.      * 


XIX 

Nevada  County. 

Grass  Valley  Tidings, 
Nevada  Transcript. 

Placer  County. 

(Auburn)  Placer  Co.  Republican. 

Sacramento  County. 

Gait  Weekly  Gazette, 
Sacramento  Record- Union, 
Sacramento  Sunday  Capital, 

San  Bernardino  County. 

Colton  Semi-Tropic, 

Riverside  Press  and  Horticulturist, 

San  Bernardino  Times. 

San  Diego  County. 

(San  Diego)  Daily  San  Diegan, 
San  Diego  Sun. 

San  Francisco. 

Alta, 

Call, 

Chronicle, 

Examiner, 

Pacific  Rural  Press, 

Political  Record, 

Post, 

Resources  of  California, 

Spirit  of  the  Times, 

Weekly  Star. 

San  Joaquin  County. 

Stockton  Independent, 
Stockton  Herald, 
Stockton  Mail. 


JX 

San  Luis  Obispo. 

San  Luis  Obispo  Tribune. 

SaKta  Barbara  County. 

Santa  Barbara  Express, 
Santa  Barbara  Press, 
Santa  Barbara  Republican, 
Santa  Barbara  Independent. 

Santa  Clara  County. 

Los  Gatos  Mail. 
San  Jose  Republican. 

Santa  Cruz  County. 

Santa  Cruz  Sentinel. 
Watson ville  Pajaronian. 

Sierra  County. 

(Downieville)  Mountain  Messenger. 

Solano  County. 

Dixon  Tribune, 

Vallejo  Evening  Chronicle, 

(Vacaville)  Judicion. 

Sonoma  County. 

Petaluma  Argus, 
Petaluma  Courier, 
Santa  Rosa  Democrat. 

Stanislaus  County. 

Modesto  Herald, 
Modesto  News, 
Modesto  Republican. 

Tehama  County. 

(Red  Bluff)  Tehama  Democrat. 


XXI 


Tulare  County. 

Traver  Tidings, 
Tulare  Kegister, 
Visalia  Delta. 

Yuba  County. 

Marysville  Democrat. 

There  are  many  others  not  included  in  this  list  for  the 
reason  that  the  Committee  has  not  yet  had  access  to  all. 
For  their  united  and  valuable  assistance  the  gratitude  of  all 
is  due.  Only  through  their  timely  aid,  the  gallant  fight  for 
irrigation  made  at-  the  last  Legislature  became  possible. 
By  their  intelligent  and  exhaustive  elucidation  of  the  irri- 
gation question,  the  people  all  over  the  State  have  been  ed- 
ucated and  aroused  to  its  importance. 

The  Committee,  personally,  and  in  behalf  of  all  irriga- 
tors, desire  to  tender  thanks  to  the  Press,  and  urge  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  work  so  efficiently  begun.  With  its  power- 
ful re-enforcement,  we  are  confident  of  carrying  the  fight 
against  riparianism  to  a  successful  issue. 

We  reprint  a  large  number  of  extracts  from  the  press  and 
commend  them  to  the  attention  of  all.  A  supplement  con- 
taining extracts  from  newspapers,  not  yet  received,  and 
articles  hereafter  published,  will  be  issued  by  this  Com- 
mittee during  the  session  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention. 

J.  De  Barth  Shore,  i- 

W.  S.  Green, 

H.  S.  Dixon, 

E.  H.  Tucker, 

L.  M.  Holt, 

J.  F.  Wharton, 

E.    HUDNUT, 

L.  B.  Kuggles, 

D.    K.    ZUMWALT, 

Executive  Committee. 


ADDRESS 


To  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  California, 

Convened  at  its  Twenty-sixth  Session. 

The  undersigned  constitute  a  Committee  appointed  by  the  State  Irrigation  v 
Convention,  held  at  Fresno,  in  December,  1884. 

Pursuant  to  the  powers  conferred  upon  us  by  that  body,  we  address  you  in 
advocacy  of  several  measures  now  before  you  relating  to  the  subject  of  irriga- 
tion. 

Our  purpose  is  to  present  tb  you  as  briefly  as  possible,  a  few  of  the  reasons 
which  make  immediate  legislation  upon  the  subject,  of  inestimable  import- 
ance. Also,  to  convince  you,  if  possible,  that  the  bills  mentioned  are  the 
best  yet  proposed,  and  will,  if  enacted,  go  far  to  restore  order  out  of  the  ex- 
isting chaotic  condition  of  the  State  water  law,  by  authorizing  and  regulating 
the  use  of  water  for  irrigation. 

lERIGATION   A  NATURAL  WANT. 

It  seems  superfluous  to  restate  or  add  to  the  facts  already  well  known  and 
often  repeated,  showing  that  irrigation  is  a  natural  necessity  throughout  a 
large  portion  of  the  State;  it  has  never  been  denied  that  such  is  the  case. 
The  necessity  has  already  been  recognized  and  declared  at  previous  sessions 
of  the  Legislature.  The  present  State  Engineer  bears  testimony  to  it.  Many 
decisions  of  the  courts  have  conceded  the  fact  as  one  of  which  they  will  take 
judicial  notice.  The  extensive  irrigation  works  already  constructed,  and  the 
annual  expenditures  of  vast  amounts  of  money  upon  irrigation,  places  it  be- 
yond controversy. 

Our  own  testimony  and  that  of  the  people  in  whose  behalf  we  address  you, 
is  at  your  command  and  to  be  corroborated  by  thousands  in  every  part  of  the 
State. 

BENEFITS  OF  IBEIQATION. 

The  product  of  the  soil  is  the  principal  source  of  the  wealth  of  the  people. 
Artificial  irrigation  has  made  possible  an  enormous,  almost  an  unlimited  in- 
crease in  the  area  of  cultivated  land.  This  has  been,  and  will  in  the  future, 
be  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  enlargement  of  population.  Each  sup- 
plements the  other.  Great  strides  have  been  made  already  in  many  branches 
of  industry  to  which  irrigation  is  necessary. 

The  production  of  fruit  is  constantly  becoming  greater.     Grapes,  raisins,  i./' 
wine  and  brandy  are  among  the  most  important  of  our  exports.     Countless 
herds  of  cattle  are  fattened  for  home  and  foreign  market  from  the  yield  of 
irrigated  land.    Sheep  by  thousands  are  grazed  upon  grasses  artificially  wa- 
tered.   Our  wool  production  is  growing  rapidly.     With  water  for  his  land  the 


vy 


v/ 


2 


owner  can  choose  at  his  will  whatever  he  desires  to  cultivate.  The  possibili- 
ties of  the  soil  are  boundless.  Land-owners  are  constantly  increasing  the 
value  and  variety  of  their  productions  by  repeated  experiments.  The  price 
of  land  increases  at  an  incredible  ratio  with  the  introduction  of  water.  The 
statistics  of  population,  area  of  cultivated  land,  and  productions  of  various 
kinds  will  show  you  the  wonderful  progress  which  Southern  California  has 
made  with  the  gradual  extension  of  irrigation.  The  reports  of  the  railroad 
and  steamship  companies  will  convince  you  of  the  magnitude  of  its  trade. 
The  merchants  of  San  Francisco  can  bear  witness  to  the  prominent  position 
which  it  occupies  with  relation  to  the  commerce  of  that  city.  The  residents 
of  that  section  will  testify  that  whatever  success  they  have  attained  and  what- 
ever prosperity  the  future  has  in  store  for  them,  can  be  ascribed  to  irrigation. 

Without  attempting,  accurately,  to  state  the  acreage  now  irrigated,  nor  the 
money  invested  in  irrigation  works,  it  is  suflSicient  for  our  present  purpose  to 
remind  you  that  at  a  moderate  estimate  there  are  now  many  hundred  thousand 
acres  of  irrigated  land,  and  ditches  and  canals  many  thousand  miles  in 
length,  constructed  and  maintained  at  a  cost  of  not  less  than  $100,000,000. 

The  works  already  constructed  will  furnish  means  of  irrigation  for  double 
the  amount  of  land  now  irrigated.  The  water  of  our  rivers,  economically 
distributed,  will  suffice  to  extend  irrigation  to  millions  of  acres  yet  un- 
touched. 

By  the  construction  of  reservoirs  in  the  mountains,  the  water  supply  can 
be  indefinitely  increased,  and  large  quantities  utilized,  now  yearly  wasted 
during  the  winter  and  spring  freshets;  but  this  can  only  be  accomplished  by 
State  means,  or  through  the  co-operation  of  large  capital,  and  must  await  the 
gradual  development  of  the  country. 

INJURIOUS  CONSEQUENCES  OF  DENIAL  OP    EIGHT   OP  IRRIGATION. 

Of  all  the  land  now  under  irrigation,  that  portion  bordering  upon  river 
banks,  the  property  of  riparian  owners,  forms  an  insignificant  fraction,  and 
even  that  is  irrigated  by  water  claimed  by  actual  appropriation  and  not  by 
virtue  of  a  riparian  right.  Compared  with  the  area  still  to  be  irrigated,  the 
area  in  riparian  ownership  is  infinitesmal.  The  consequences  of  depriving 
all,  or  all  but  riparian  owners,  from  irrigating  are  simply  frightful  to  contem- 
plate. Indeed,  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive  them  at  once.  The  physical  effects 
upon  the  face  of  the  country  can  only  be  fully  comprehended  by  those  early 
settlers  who  saw  a  sand  waste  where  he  now  beholds  a  prospering  farm. 
Who  can  picture  to  himself  the  condition  of  the  people  when  the  day  comes 
that  tells  them  in  the  name  of  the  law  that  they  shall  not  take  the  water  of 
the  river  for  their  dying  crops?  It  takes  but  the  commonest  observation  and 
the  least  reflection  to  perceive  that  the  use  of  the  ripa,  for  any  practical  pur- 
pose, is  impossible  upon  our  ordinary  California  stream.  In  England  and  in 
other  wet  countries  the  water  is  not  used  or  needed  for  irrigation,  and  all  the 
uses  of  the  stream  for  mills  and  the  like  are  upon  the  bank.  The  uses  are 
such  as  that  the  water,  if  momentarily  diverted,  can  be  and  is  immediately 
turned  back  in  full  volume.    There  is  no  use  of  the  water  desirable  or  prac- 


ticable  except  upon  the  bank.  Here  the  reverse  is  the  rule.  The  most 
valuable  and  essential  use  of  the  water  is  to  vivify  the  ground  and  stimulate 
production  by  irrigation.  This  cannot  be  done  on  the  banks;  it  is  not  ripa- 
rian, and  the  water  when  taken  out  and  used  is  absorbed  by  the  ground  and 
cannot  be  returned.  Every  one  familiar  with  our  physical  conditions,  knows 
well  that  a  river  channel  through  any  man's  land  is  here,  as  a  rule,  but  a 
washed-out  sanely  depression,  bordered  by  a  few  trees  and  willows,  and  gen- 
erally in  the  season  when  alone  water  is  useful,  only  the  dry,  unsightly 
bed  of  a  sunken  stream,  and  even  when  the  water  flows  in  it,  no  ordinary 
small  fixrraer,  if  owning  land- upon  it,  can  take  the  water  out  on  his  own  land 
unless  he  can  first  teach  it  to  run  up  hill.  He  has  to  go  above  upon  the  land 
of  some  upper  proprietor  to  divert  it,  in  derogation  of  the  so-called  riparian 
rights  below  him,  in  order  to  get  it  out  of  the  stream  on  to  his  own  land.  So 
far  as  watering  cattle  is  concerned,  there  are  few  of  the  great  stock  men  of 
the  San  Joaquin  plains  who  do  not  rely  upon  wells  for  that  purpose,  and  for 
the  reason  that  the  water  of  the  streams  in  the  hot  summer  weather  becomes 
full  of  vegetable  and  animal  matter,  and  often  destroys  the  cattle  in  large 
numbers. 

But  even  suppose  the  water  can  be  used  and  is  convenient  for  use  to  water 
stock.  Suppose  to  take  it  away  would  be  inconvenient  to  the  man  owning 
more  or  less  cattle  who  owns  the  bank.  Suppose,  in  short,  that  some  one 
must  suffer  inconvenience  and  hardship,  no  matter  which  rule  prevails. 
What  then  is  to  be  done?  Which  is  better?  That  a  few  men,  the  limited  few 
who  own  the  bank,  should  have  the  exclusive  use  of  the  stream  to  water 
their  stock,  all  irrigation  be  stopped,  all  the  progress  of  the  past  be  blotted 
out,  and  ruin  and  destruction  be  brought  to  all  the  prosperous  and  happy 
homes  of  which  now  irrigation  i%  the  cause,  the  life  and  the  only  hope;  or 
that  the  stream  be  used  so  as  to  irrigate  the  greatest  amount  of  land  which  it 
is  capable  of  irrigating,  so  as  to  stimulate  production  to  its  widest  limits,  so 
as  to  build  up  homes  of  plenty  and  happy  firesides,  and  rich  and  prosperous 
communities  and  peoples,  even  if  the  stook  men  do  have  to  sink  a  few  wells 
to  water  their  stock?  Which  is  best — the  desert,  with  a  few  herds  and  their 
scattering  attendants,  or  green  fields,  orchards,  the  fcvine,  the  olive,  the 
orange,  the  ripening  grain  and  the  happiness  and  prosperity  which  attends 
safe  and  certain  husbandry? 

CUSTOMS  AND  USAGES,    IBKESPECTIVE   OP  LAW. 

Whether  authorized  by  law  or  not,  it  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that, 
dating  back  prior  to  our  conquest,  the  customs  and  usages  of  the  inhabitants 
justified  the  diversion  and  use  of  water  for  agricultural  and  other  purposes. 
Common  consent  and  common  necessity  gradually  gave  form'and  life  to  the  / 
custom.  The  rule  was  adopted  in  settlement  of  disputes  over  water,  between 
man  and  man,  that  he  who  was  prior  in  time  gained  priority  of  right.  Prac- 
tically, the  common  law  of  riparian  rights  was  unknown.  It  was  not  invoked 
between  claimants  of  water,  and  fell  into  disuse.    This  was  not  alone  the 


case  between  individuals,  bat  was  universal  everywhere.  To  the  farmer 
wishing  to  irrigate  it  never  occurrtd  that  he  could  not  appropriate  water  at 
his  pleasure.  Not  even  the  riparian  owner  claimed  or  insisted  on  rights  ex- 
cept by  actual  appropriation.  Neither  he  nor  any  other  appropriator 
thought  of  insisting  that  the  water  of  a  stream  should  run  confined  to  its 
natural  course  any  more  than  that  they  would  have  expected  it  to  run  up 
stream. 

This  custom  became,  unto  laymen  at  least,  a  rule  of  property,  so  that  their 
contests  over  water  were  always,  as  to  priority  and  quantity,  regardless  of  the 
ownership  or  situation  of  land. 


By  the  Act  of  1850  adopting  the  common  law  it  is  provided  :  "  That  the 
common  law  of  England  so  far  as  it  is  not  repugnant  to  or  inconsistent  with 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States;  or  the  Constitution  or  laws  of  the 
State  of  California,  shall  be  the  rule  of  decision  in  all  the  Courts  of  this 
Slate."    This  provision  was  re-enacted  in  the  Political  Code. 

This  statute  has  been  the  subject  of  judicial  conatruction  in  many  cases,  as 
have  like  provisions  in  the  laws  of  other  States.  In  some  of  the  original 
States  the  substance  of  this  law  was  held  by  the  courts  to  be  the  rule  of 
their  decisions  even  when  not  made  the  written  law.  By  the  incorporation 
of  this  rule  into  the  body  of  the  statutes,  it  was  the  intention  of  the  earliar 
lawgivers  of  the  State  to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  the  older  States.  It  is 
therefore  necessary  to  examine  the  decisions  of  the  courts  of  other  states  to 
learn  their  construction  of  this  statute,  and  upon  comparison  with  the  in- 
terpretation of  it  given  by  our  own  courts,  to  establish  its  effect  upon  the 
rule  of  decision  which  should  govern  cases  involving  water  rights  in  this 
State.  • 

It  must  be  kept  in  mind  at  the  same  time,  that  the  language  of  our  statute 
is  "the  Common  Law  of  England,**  and  that  it  is  claimed  by  the  ripariaTiists 
that  according  to  that  common  law  that — 

"  Every  proprietor  of  lands  on  the  bank  of  a  stream,  has  an  equal  right  to 
"use  the  waters  which  flow  in  the  stream,  and  consequently  no  proprietor 
"  can  have  the  right  to  use  the  water  to  the  prejudice  of  any  other  proprietor. 
•'  Without  the  consent  of  the  other  proprietors,  no  proprietor  can  either 
"diminish  the  quantity  of  water  which  would  otherwise  descend  to  the  pro- 
**  prietors  below  or  throw  the  water  back  upon  the  proprietors  above." 

And,  that  it  is  also  claimed  by  the  riparianists  that  by  our  statute  every 
part  and  portion  of  that  common  law  has  been  adopted,  no  matter  how  un- 
Buited  to  our  condition  or  repugnant  to  our  customs  and  manners. 

"We  quote  from  Sedgwick  on  the  Construction  of  Statutory  and  Consti- 
tutional Law,  a  well-known  work,  accessible  to  all: 

•'  The  colonists  who  settled  this  country  were  Engliskmen,  with  the  feel- 
"  ings,  the  attachments  and  the  prejudices  of  Englishmen.  It  became 
"necessary  for  them  to  establish,  or  recognize  and  adhere  to  some  system  of 
"law  from  the  moment  "they  landed.    That  system  was  English,  and'ac- 


"cordingly,  we  find  the  doctrine  to  have  always  been  that  the  colonists  were 
«'  subject  to,  and,  as  it  were,  brought  with  them,  the  great  principles  of  the 
•'common  law  of  the  mother  country,  with  such  modifications  as  the  legis- 
"  lative  enactments  of  Parliament  had  at  that  time  introduced  into  it,  or  the 
"particular  situation  of  the  colonists  in  their  new  condition  requir'ed." 

"  The  declaration  of  rights  made  by  the  first  Continental  Congress  in  1774 
"declares  that  *  the  respective  colonies  are  entitled  to  the  common  law  of 
**  'England,  and  to  the  benefit  of  such  English  statutes  as  existedat  the  time 
"'of  their  colonization,  and  which  they  have  hy  experience  found  to  be  applicable 
*•  *to  their  social,  local  and  other  circumstances." 

"This  is  the  uniform  language  of  our  judicial  decisions,  whether  of 
**  Federal  or  State  tribunals.  It  has  been  declared  by  the  Supreme  Court  of 
•'the  United  States  *  *  *  that  the  common  law  of  America  is  not  to  be 
"taken  in  all  respects  to  be  that  of  England;  but  that  the  settlers  brought 
"with  them  and  adopted  only  that  portion  which  was  applicable  to  their 
''  situation." 

Further  on  he  says  :  "It  is  very  important  to  bear  in  mind  the  exception 
"  already  mentioned,  thatxouly  so  much  of  the  English  common  law  was 
"  adopted  by  the  colonies  as  was  applicable  to  their  condition," 

Sustaining  his  text,  he  cites  cases  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court, 
New  York,  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire. 

It  will  also  be  seen  by  quotations  from  the  Constitutions  of  several  States, 
cited  by  him  on  pages  10,  11  and  12,  that  the  language  adopting  the  common 
law  is  similar  to  our  statute,  and  while  there  is  in  them  no  express  exemption  of 
such  portions  of  the  common  law  as  W2S  inapplicable  to  the  condition  or  situation 
of  the  p'lrticular  community,  yet  such  exemption  has  been  assumed  by  the  Courts. 

The  adoption  of  this  English  common  law  by  our  legislative  en  ictment 
simply  adopted  the  common  law  system  as  distinguished  from  the  civil  law 
system  which  prevailed  in  this  State  under  Spanish-American  rule.  The 
common  law  system  was  adopted  here,  as  it  was  in  New  York,  in  Ohio,  in 
Iowa,  and  in  fact  nearly  all  the  States  of  the  Union,  but  as  in  all  the  other 
States  as  here,  that  adoption  did  not  include  those  portions  thereof  which 
are  wholly  inconsistent  with  our  condition,  habits,  necessities,  and  institu- 
tions as  a  people. 

It  is  contended  by  the  riparianists  that  the  Legislature,  in  adopting  the 
common  law  of  England,  intended  that,  except  as  far  as  modified  by  express 
statute,  it  should  be  rigidly  followed  in  every  particular,  however  absurd, 
inconvenient,  and  repugnant  to  the  conditions  of  life  in  Cdlifornia  some  of 
its  principles  might  prove  to  be.  It  is  claimed  that  the  common  law  as 
adopted  here  is  an  inflexible,  unyielding  system  of  legal  doctrines  and  rules, 
like  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  "  which  altereth  not." 

You  are  asked  to  believe  that  in  selecting  t'uis  system  as  her  code  of  "  un- 
written law,"  California  has,  so  to  speak,  deliberately  encased  her  young  and 
growing  form  in  a  cumbersome,  ill-fitting  suit  of  medieval  armor,  which  is 
so  riveted   and   joined  together  that  nothing  but  legislation,  and  not  even 


6 

that,  can  remove  it.  This  theory  attributes  to  the  common  law  a  rigidity 
and  fixedness  of  character  which  it  does  not  possess  even  in  England.  It  is 
there  a  growing,  changing  system,  accommodating  itself,  from  age  to  age,  to 
the  necessities  and  convenience  of  the  nation. 
yj  Common  law  is  but  customary  law,  and  a  custoii  not  in  accordance  with 
the  needs  of  the  people  could  not  possibly  be  established. 

Sedgwick  says,  at  page  10:  "Bat  the  common  law  is  perpetually 
"fluctuating."  *  *  *  "  it  was  therefore  necessary  to  fix  a  time  after 
"  which  any  changes efifected  in  the  common  law  of  the  mother  country  would 
• '  have  no  effect  here." 

At  page  4,  he  says:  "To  this  source  (i.  e.,  custom,)  is  also  chiefly  to  be 
*'  traced  the  great  body  of  the  original  English  law  '  that  ancient  collection  of 
"  unwritten  maxims  and  customs  called  the  Common  Law,'  which  still  exer- 
"  cises  such  extensive  sway  in  both  England  and  America,  and  on  which  we 
"  daily  see  engrafted  regulations  owing  their  origin  to  the  same  principle." 

Since  the  system  possesses  this  plastic  character  in  the  land  where  it  or- 
iginated, it  must  continue  to  possess  it  where  adopted  here,  whether  adopted 
by  express  statute  or  by  voluntary  recognition  of  the  courts  as  a  part  of  our 
heritage  as  descendants  of  the  English  nation. 
^  It  has  been  uniformly  adjudged  in  this  country  that  the  common  law,  how- 
ever adopted,  is  in  force  here  only  so  far  as  it  is  adapted  to  our  situation, 
wants  and  institutions. 

Says  that  great  New  York  jurist.  Judge  Bronson:  "I  think  no  doctrine 
"  better  settled  than  that  such  portions  of  the  law  of  England  as  are  not 
"  adapted  to  our  own  condition  form  no  part  of  the  law  of  this  State.  The 
"  exception  includes  not  only  such  laws  as  are  inconsistent  with  the  spirit 
"  of  our  institutions,  but  such  as  were  framed  with  special  reference  to  the  physi- 
"  cal  condition  of  a  country  differing  widely  from  our  own.  It  is  contrary  to 
"  the  spirit  of  the  common  law  to  apply  a  rule  founded  on  a  particular  rea- 
"  son  to  a  case  where  that  reason  utterly  fails.  Cessante  ratione  legis,  cassal 
'*  ipsa  lex." 

20  Wend.,  159. 

So,  also,  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  American  jurists  and  statesman, 
Judge  Thurman  of  Ohio,  lays  down  the  same  rule  in  language  too  plain  to  'be 
mistaken.  He  says:  "  The  English  common  law,  so  far  as  it  is  reasonable 
"  in  itself,  suitable  to  the  condition  and  business  of  our  people,  and  consis- 
•*  tent  with  the  letter  and  spirit  of  our  Federal  and  State  constitutions  and 
"  statutes,  has  been  and  is  followed  by  our  courts,  and  may  be  said  to  con- 
"  stitute  part  of  the  common  law  of  Ohio.  But  whenever  it  has  been  found 
"  wanting  in  either  of  these  requisites  our  courts  have  not  hesitated  to 
"  modify  it  to  suit  our  circumstances,  or,  if  necessary,  to  wholly  depart 
"  from  it." 

2  Ohio  State  Rep.,  329. 


strictly  in  accord  with  this  view  is  the  opinion  of  Chief  Justice  Wright,  of 
Iowa,  where  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  that  State, 
after  declaring  the  common  law  to  be  there  in  force,  he  continues:  "To  say 
**  that  every  principle  of  that  law,  however  inapplicable  to  our  wants'or  in&ti- 
"  tutions,  is  to  continue  in  force  until  changed  by  some  legislative  rule,  we 
"  believe  has  never  been  claimed,  neither  indeed  could  it  be  with  any  degree 
•'  of  reason."  And  farther  in  the  sims  opinion,  he  says:  "  When  the  com- 
*'  mon  law  has  been  repealed  or  changed  by  the  institution  of  either  the 
"  States  or  National  Government,  or  by  their  legislative  enactments,  it  is,  of 
*'  course,  not  binding.  So,  also,  it  is  safe  to  say  when  it  has  been  varied  by  cus- 
*'  torn,  not  founded  in  reason,  or  not  consonant  to  the  genius  and  manner  of  the 
"  people,  it  ceases  to  have  force.'^ 
3  Iowa,  402. 

Says  Mr.  Justice  Story:  "The  common  law  of  England  is  not  to  be  taken 
"  in  all  respects  to  be  that  of  America.     Our  ancestors  brought  with  them  its 
"  general  principles  and  claimed  it  as  their  birthright;  but  they  brought  with 
*'  them  and  adopted  only  that  portion  which  loas  applicable  to  their  situation." 
2  Peters,  144. 

The  reports  of  the  American  Courts  are  full  of  kindred  decisions.  These 
are  to  be  found  in  Illinois  (one  decision  by  Judge  Trumbull),  in  Arkansas,  in 
Mississippi,  in  Pennsylvania,  in  Massachusetts,  in  Tennessee,  in  Wisconsin, 
and  indeed  in  all  the  States  where  the  question  has  ever  been  raised. 

Can  any  good  reason  be  given  why  beautiful  California  should  not  be  sub- 
ject to  the  same  enlightened  ruFe,  or  why  her  fair  present  should  be  destroyed 
and  her  future  made  hopeless  to  enforce  the  contrary  one? 

In  connection  with  the  proposition  here  advanced,  we  beg  leave  to  refer  in 
the  appendix  to  this  address,  to  the  case  ]of  Coffin  vs.  Left-Hand  Ditch  Co., 
decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  Colorado,  a  great  irrigating  State  like  our 
own,  in  which  the  common  law  pertaining  to  riparian  rights  is  held  to  be  in- 
applicable to  the  condition  of  the  country  and  to  form  no  part  of  its  laws, 
even  prior  to  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  which  expressly  authorized  water 
appropriation. 

The  conclusion  must  be  that,  by  the  Act  of  1850,  we  adopted  only  such 
portion  of  the  common  law  of  England  as  was  applicable  to  our  condition, 
and  whatever  we  did  take  of  the  common  law  included  a  power  and  duty  ex- 
isting in  Judges  and  Courts  exercising  common  law  jurisdiction  to  modify  the 
common  law  when  demanded  by  common  necessity,  and  reconcile  conflicting 
decisions  arising  either  from  such  modifications  or  from  the  misapprehension 
as  to  the  applicability  of  any  portion  of  the  common  law,  and  this  without 
any  usurpation  of  the  powers  of  the  Legislature. 

Our  courts,  including  the  Supreme  Court  as  it  is  now  constituted,  have 
recognized  and  acted  upon  these  rules  ever  since  their  organization,  most 
frequently  in  cases  involving  water  rights. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  cases  involving  rights  acquired  by  appropriation, 
beginning  with  the  Supreme  Court  as  it  was  first  constituted,   and  ending  in 


the  Court  as  it  now  stands,   and  also  cases  by  the  Uoited  States  Supreme 
Court : 

Irwin  vs.  Fhillips,  5  Cal.,  140. 

Tartar  vs.  Spring  Creek  Co.,  5  Cal.,  397. 

Conger  vs.  Weaver,  6  Cal.,  555. 

Hill  vs.  King,  8  Cal.,  338. 

Butte  Co.  vs.  Vaughan,  11  Cal.,  153. 

McDonald  vs.  B(ar  River  Co.,  13  Cal.,  232. 

Rupley  vs.  Welch,  23  Cal..  455. 

N.  C.  <b  S.  Co.  ys.  Kidd,  37  Cal.,  314. 

Osgood  vs.  El  Dorado  Water  Co. ,  56  Cal. 

Atchisonvs.  Peterson,  20  Wall.,  507. 

Basey  vs.  Gallagher,  20  Wall.,  670. 

Jennison  vs.  Kirk,  98  U.  S.,  458. 

Broder  vs.  Natoma  Water  Co.,  101  U.  S..  274. 

These  cases  show  that  our  courts  have  adopted  the  rule  above  stated,  and 
have  squarely  asserted  the  power  to  pass  upon  the  fact  as  to  whether  or  not 
a  portion  of  the  common  law  of  England  was  inapplicable  to  our  situation  or 
condition.  They  also  assumed  the  right  to  modify  the  decisions  of  their 
predecessors,  in  a  number  of  cases,  as  will  be  readily  observed  by  any  who 
will  read  the  decisions. 

Instead  of  quoting  from  these  various  decisions  we  give  an  extract  fiom 
Mr.  Judge  Field's  opinion  in  Atchison  vs.  Peterson,  which  summarizes  them 
all.  He  says  (20  Wallace,  511):  "  As  respects  the  use  of  water  for  mining 
**  purposes,  the  doctrines  of  the  common  law  declartory  <  f  the  rights  of  riparian 
"  owners  were  at  an  early  day,  after  the  discovery  of  gold  found  to  be  inap- 
*'j?Zica6Ze,  or  applicable  only  in  a  very  limited  extent  to  the  necessities  of 
*•  miners  and  inadequate  to  their  protection.  ^ 

'•This  equality  of  right"  (riparian),  "among  all  the  proprietors  on  the 
'*  same  stream  would  have  been  incompatible  with  any  extended  diver- 
"  sion  of  the  water  by  one  prospector,  and  its  conveyance  for  mining 
"  purposes  to  points  from  which  it  could  not  be  restored  to  the 
"  stream.  But  the  Government  being  the  sole  proprietor  of  all  the  public 
••  lands,  whether  bordering  on  streams  or  otherwise,  there  was  no  occasion 
**  for  the  application  of  the  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  proprietorship 
"  with  respect  to  the  waters  of  these  streams.  The  Government  by  its  silent 
*'  acquiescence  assented  to  the  general  occupatiou  of  the  public  lands 
*•  for  mining,  and  to  encourage  their  free  and  unlimited  use  for  that  pur- 
"  pose  reserved  such  lands  as  were  mineral  from  sale  and  the  acquisition  of 
"  title  by  settlement.  And  he  who  first  connects  his  own  labor  with  property 
**  thus  situated  and  open  to  general  exploration,  does,  in  natural  justice, 
*•  acquire  a  better  right  to  its  use  and  enjoyment  than  others  who  have  not 
*•  given  such  labor.  So  the  miners  on  the  public  lands  throughout  the  Pacific 
"  tStates  and  Territories,  by  their  customs,  usages  and  regulations,  everywhere 


9 


'•  recognized  the  inherent  justice  of  this  principle;  and  the  principle  itself  was  at 
"  an  early  period  recognized  and  enforced  by  the  Court  in  these  States  and  Ter- 
•*  ritories." 

In  the  case  of  Basey  vs.  Gallagher,  20  Wallace,  682,  the  views  expressed 
and  rulings  made,  just  now  quoted,  are  held  equally  applicable  to  the  use  of 
water  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  and  no  distinction,  it  is  held,  is  made  in  those 
States  and  Territories  by  the  custom  of  miners  or  settlers,  or  by  the  Courts^  in 
the  rights  of  the  first  appropriator  from  the  use  made  of  the  water  if  the  use 
be  a  beneficial  one. 

Thus  stands  the  law  of  appropriation,  as  applied  to  the  public  lands.  It 
had  its  origin  in  the  necessities  of  the  situation  and  condition  of  the  people 
and  the  country. 

The  two  great  resources  of  the  State  are,  and  have  ever  been,  mining  and 
agricultur?.  The  climate,  topography  and  physical  condition  of  the  State 
and  the  necessities  of  the  people  have  rendered  the  diversion  of  water  from 
streams,  both  for  mining  and  agricultural  pursuits,  essential. 

All  of  the  lands  in  the  State  except  Mexican  grants  were,  at  the  time  of 
our  admission  into  the  Union,  public  lands  of  the  United  States.  The 
climate,  topography  and  physical  condition  of  the  State  and  the  necessities  of 
the  people  have  not  changed  in  kind  since  1850.  They  have  remained  the  same 
through  all  the  years,  notwithstanding  the  gradual  alienation  of  land  by  the 
Government  to  individuals.  The  common  Jaw  became  no  less  inappli- 
cable because  the  land  no  longer  remained  public. 

The  same  customs  and  usages  in  regard  to  the  appropriation  of  water  for  all 
useful  purposes  were  practiced  universally,  with  a  total  disregard  by  all 
of  ownership  of  land  whether  public  or  private.  It  was  these  usages  and 
customs  which  caused  the  courts  to  take  notice  of  and'  declare  the  inapplica- 
bility of  the  common  law  of  England,  as  to  public  lands,  and  to  recognize 
the  right  of  appropriation  as  to  such  lands.  They  performed  their  duty  by 
ascertaining  the  fact  of  the  inapplicability  of  the  riparian  law,  and  then  de- 
clared it  not  to  be  the  law.  The  same  duty  was  incumbent  on  them  with 
relation  to  lands  reduced  to  private  ownership  when  occasion  arose,  the 
inapplicability  being  the  same.  But  until  the  case  of  Lux  vs.  Haggin  the 
opportunity  never  came,  as  all  cases  arising  were  between  appropriators  on 
public  lands. 

The  case  of  Ferreavs.  Knipe,  28  Cal.,  340,  .was  the  case  of  an  appropriator 
against  one  who,  claiming  as  a  riparian  owner,  had  stopped  all  the  water  of 
the  stream.  The  question  as  to  whether  an;  appropriator' s  right  was 
superior  to  the  riparian  right  was  not  necessary  to  the  decision,  and  was  not 
determined.  The  Court  decided  that,  assuming  defendant  was  a  riparian 
owner,  he  had  no  right  as  such  to  obstruct  all  the  water  in  the  stream  in. 
such  a  manner  as  to  become  lost  by  absorption  and  evaporation.  All  else  in 
the  opinion  is  mere  dictum. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  question  of  relative  superiority  between  riparian 
rights  at  common  law  and  rights  by  appropriation  are  not  necessarily  in- 


/ 


10 


volved  in  any  ca^e,  exoept  the  recent  case  of  L'lx  vs.   Hajfm,  in  which  tha 
four  Justices  constituting  the  majority  of  the  Ojurt  held  that  rights    by   ap- 
propriation cannot  be  acquired  as  agiinst  a  private  riparian  owner;    and  this 
case  is  on  rehearing,  and  not  yet  settled  law. 

Any  decision  in  favor  of  a  riparian  owner  and  against  an  appropriator, 
must  disregard  an  existing  fact;  a  fact  demonstrated  to  exist  by  the  customs 
and  usages  of  thirty-five  continuous  years — and  that  is,  that  the  necessities 
of  the  people,  and  the  climate  and  physical  condition  of  the  State,  make 
the  English  riparian  doctrine,  in  any  form,  inapplicable  here.  This  ques- 
tion of  fact  yet  remains  to  be  finally  determined  by  the  Courts. 

The  law  of  riparian  rights  and  the  law  of  appropriation  will  not  assimilate. 
Either  can  exist  only  by  the  exclusion  of  the  other.  The  true  course  is  to 
ascertain  and  determine  the  question  of  applicability.  The  present  Supreme 
Court  have  the  same  power  and  right  to  determine  and  declare  this,  and  to 
reconcile  conflicting  decisions  as  their  predecessors  had. 
y  We  submit  to  your  good  judgment  that  the  representatives  of  the  people 
have  also  a  good  right  to  declare  by  statute  the /ad  that  the  portion  common 
law  of  England,  as  expounded  by  the  courts,  to  be  repugnant  to  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  climate,  topography,  and  physical  condition  of  the  State  and 
the  necessities  of  the  people  thereof,  and  the  laws  thereof  concerning  the 
appropriation  of  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation.  In  future  water  litigation 
the  Supreme  Court  may  accept  it,  or  they  may  reject  it,  as  binding  authority, 
so  far  as  the  past  is  concerned.  Or  they  may  consider  it  as  evidence  of  the 
fact,  although  not  conclusive.  But  with  the  added  clause,  "and  to  that 
extent  form  no  part  of  such  laws,"  it  will  govern  their  decisions  in  contro- 
versies arising  over  rights  to  be  hereafter  acquired.  We  shall  have  no  new 
riparian  owners  to  put  stumbling  blocks  in  the  way  of  irrigation. 

We  ask  you,  we  urge  you,  in  behalf  of  the  irrigators  of  the  State,  and  in 
the  interest  of  the  entire  people,  to  so  legislate  upon  the  subject  of  irrigation 
as  to  assure  the  continued  advance  of  the  State  by  the  development  of  its 
agricultural  interests  through  the  means  of  irrigation. 

We  are  convinced  that  if  nothing  is  done  at  this  session,  the  progress  of 
the  State  will  receive  a  serious  check,  entailing  upon  the  people  the  loss  of 
millions  of  property.  Your  failure  to  pass  the  pending  bills  will  be  regarded 
as  a  public  calamity  affecting  the  material  welfare  of  the  whole  State. 

We  earnestly  request  you  to  enact  the  bills  which  we  have  heretofore 
nrged  upon  your  committees.  We  believe  that  the  passage  of  Senate  Bill  210 
and  Assembly  Bill  No.  410  in  the  form  in  which  it  has  already  passed  the 
Assembly,  is  the  best  possible,  indeed,  the  only  feasible  solution  of  the 
question,  as  between  riparian  owners  and  appropriators.  Under  the  ex- 
isting state  of  uncertainty  irrigation  must  be  suspended  until  assured  of 
protection  by  the  law.  If  riparian  rights  are  to  be  upheld,  irrigation  must 
no  longer  be  numbered  as  one  of  our  industries.  What  we  ask  by  this  bill 
is  that  we  may  be  allowed  to  pay  riparian  owners  for  whatever  rights  they 
have  to  water  which  is  more  necessary  for  irrigation  than  for  any  purpose  to 


11 


which  they  can  apply  it;  but  wish  to  be  protected  against  their  exorbitant 
demands  by  a  provision  for  ascertaining  just  compensation  for  loss  or 
damage. 

If  Bills  410  and  210,  guaranteeing  water  for  irrigation,  shall  pass,  we 
further  urge  the  enactment  of  the  bills  proposed  for  the  formation  of  Dis- 
tricts and  the  regulation  of  water  distribution,  for  amending  the  water-right 
clause  in  the  Constitution  and  for  the  adjudication  of  claims  to  water. 

We  do  not  claim  for  these  measures  that  they  are  infallible  or  beyond 
criticism.  The  very  men  who  have  declared  that  this  is  a  subject  full  of 
complications  and  difficulties,  have  required  of  us  'the  presentation  of  bills 
to  which  no  objection  could  be  made.  No  such  bill  can  be  framed.  With 
the  experience  of  all  the  ages  of  the  past,  no  legislator  has  ever  been  able 
to  draw  a  revenue  law  free  from  serious  objection,  yet  no  one  has  argued 
from  this  that  we  should  have  no  revenue  laws. 

These  bills  have  been  carefully  prepared,  revised  and  amended.  They  have 
the  unanimous  endorsernent  of  irrigators,  and  of  nearly  all  the  riparian 
owners  on  streams  where  irrigation  is  carried  on.  No  one  has  proposed  any 
better  measures,  and  a  beginning  must  be  made.  There  is  a  burning  neces- 
sity for  action  now.  We  appeal  to  you  with  confidence  to  accede  to  the 
united  wishes  of  the  people  of  all  California,  with  few  exceptions,  and  en- 
act all  of  these  bills.     With  great  respect,  we  remain 

Your  most  obedient,  etc., 

J.  DeBARTH  SHORB, 
J.  F.  WHARTON, 
W.  S.  GREEN, 
R.  HUDNUT, 
H.  S.  DIXON, 
L.  B.  RUGGLES, 
E.  H.  TUCKER, 
D.  K.  ZUMWALT, 
Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention. 


12 


IN  THE  SUPKEME  COURT  OF  COLORADO. 

[Spring  Term,  1883.] 


COFFIN  KT  AL.  V.  THE  LEFT-HAND  DITCH  CO. 

1.  Water  Rights  in  Colorado — Not  Governed  by  Common-law  Rules  as 

TO  Riparian  Proprietorship,  The  doctrine  of  priority  of  right  to 
water  by  priority  of  appropriation  has  existed  in  Colorado  from  the 
earliest  appropriations  of  water  within  the  boundaries  of  the  State, 
and  not  simply  since  1876,  when  the  Constitution  was  adopted.  The 
right,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  existed  prior  to  any  legislation 
on  the  subject.     The*common-law  rule  is  not  applicable  to  Colorado. 

2.  Same — Protection  of.     The  right  of  one  who  by  prior  appropriation  has 

secured  the  beneficial  use  of  water  is  entitled  to  protection  as  well  after 
patent,  to  a  third  party,  of  the  land  over  which  the  natural  stream 
flows,  as  when  such  land  is  part  of  the  public  domain,  whether  or 
not  the  water  be  mentioned  in  or  expressly  excepted  from  the  grant. 
The  Act  of  Congress  protecting  in  patents  such  rights  '-was  rather  a 
voluntary  recognition  of  a  pre-existing  right  of  possession,  consti- 
tuting a  valid  claim  to  its  continued  use,  than  the  establishment  of  a 
new  one. 

3.  Same — Legislation  had  in  View  op  these  Rights  by  Appropriation. 

All  the  legislation  on  the  subject  in  Colorado,  including  the  Act  of  1861, 
1862  and  1864,  •  had  in  view  the  existence  and  protection  of  rights 
secured  by  prior  appropriation. 

4.  Same — Right  not  Dependent  upon  the  Locus  of  Use.    The  right  of 

water  acquired  by  prior  appropriation  is  not  in  any  way  dependent  upon 
the  locus  of  its  application  to  the  beneficial  use  designed.  That  such 
prior  appropriation  diverts  the  water  from  one  stream  to  another,  across 
the  natural  water-shed,  does  not  affect  his  rights.  The  Acts  of  1861 
and  1862  do  not  conflict  with  this  view. 

Appeal  from  the  District  Court  of  Boulder  County. 
Messrs.  Carr  and  Eime  for  appellants. 
Richard  R.  Whiteley  for  appellee. 
Helm,  J.: 

Appellee,  who  was  plaintiff  below,  claims  to  be  the  owner  of  certain  water 
by  virtue  of  an  appropriation  thereof  from  the  south  fork  of  the  St.  Vrain 
Creek.  It  appears  that  such  water,  after  its  diversion,  is  carried  by  means  of 
a  ditch  to  the  James  Creek,  and  thence  along  the  bed  of  the  same  to  Left- 
hand  Creek,  where  it  is  again  diverted  by  lateral  ditches  and  used  to  irrigate 
lands  adjacent  to  the  last  named  stream.  Appellants  are  the  owners  of  lands 
lying  on  the  margin  and  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  St.  Vrain  below  the 
mouth  of  said  south  fork  thereof,  and  naturally  irrigated  therefrom. 

In  1879  there  was  not  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water  in  the  St.  Vrain  to 
supply  the  ditch  of  the  appellee  and  also  irrigate  the  said  lands  of  appellants. 
A  portion  of  appellee's  dam  was  torn  out  and  its  diversion  of  water  thereby 
seriously  interfered  with  by  appellants.    The  action  is  brought  for  damages 


13 


arising  from  the  trespass,  and  for  iajanctive  relief  to  prevent  repetitions 
thereof  in  the  future. 

The  answer  of  appellants,  who  were  defendants  below,  is  separated  into 
six  divisions: 

First — A  specific  denial  of  all  the'material  allegations  of  the  complaint. 

Second — Allegations  concerning  an  agreement  made  at  the  date  of  the  con* 
striiction  of  appellee's  ditch;  by  this  agreement  the  parties  constructing  such 
ditch  were  to  refrain  from  the  diversioa  of  water  there  through  when  the 
quantity  in  the  St.  Vrain  was  only  suffiaient  to  supply  the  settlers  thereon. 

Third,  fourth,  fifth  and  sixth,  are  separate  answers  by  individual  defend- 
ants setting  up  a  right  to  the  water  diverted,  by  virtue  of  ownership  of  lands 
along  the  St.  Vrain,  and  in  some  instances  also  by  appropriations  of  water 
therefrom.  But  it  nowhere  appears  by  suffisient  averment  that  such  appro- 
priations of  defendants'  making  the  same  were  actually  made  prior  to  the 
diversion  of  the  water  through  appellee's  ditch. 

Demurrers  were  sustained  to  all  of  the  above  defenses  or  answers,  except 
the  first,  and  exceptions  to  the  rulings  duly  preserved;  trial  was  had  before  a 
jury  upon  the  issues  made  by  the  complaint  and  answer  as  it  then  remained, 
and  verdict  and  judgment  given  for  the  appellee. 

Such  recovery  was  confined,  however,  to  damages  for  injury  to  the  dam 
alone,  and  did  not  extend  to  those,  if  any  there  were,  resulting  from  the  loss 
of  water. 

We  do  not  think  that  the  Court  erred  in  its  ruling  upon  the  demurrers,  and 
we  believe  the  verdict  and  judgment  sustained  by  the  pleadings  and  evidence. 

Were  we  to  accept  appellants'  views  upon  the  subject  of  water  rights  in  this 
State,  it  would  yet  be  doubtful  if  we  could  justify  the  trespass.  And  if  the 
agreements  were  actually  made  as  stated  in  the  second  defense,  that  fact 
would  not  excuse  their  act  in  forcibly  destroying  the  appellee's  dam  without 
notice  or  warning.  It  is  suflficient  upon  this  subject  for  us  to  say  that, 
even  if  such  agreement  were  legal  and  binding,  and  included  subsequent  set- 
tlers on  the  St.  Vrain,  yet  appellee  'was  entitled  to  notice  of  the  insuf- 
ficiency of  water  to  supply  the  demands  of  appellants;  it  might  then,  per- 
haps, have  complied  with  the  agreement  without  serious  injury  to  its  prop- 
erty. 

But  two  important  questions  upon  the  subject  of  water  rights  are  fairly 
presented  by  the  record,  and  we  cannot  well  avoid  resting  our  decision 
upon  them. 

It  is  contended  by  counsel  for  appellants  that  the  common-law  principles 
of  riparian  proprietorship  prevailed  in  Colorado  until  1876,  and  that  the 
doctrine  of  priority  of  right  to  water  by  priority  of  appropriation  thereof  was 
first  recognized  and  adopted  in  the  Constitution.  But  we  think  the  latter 
doctrine  has  existed  from  the  date  of  the  earliest  appropriations  of  water 
within  the  boundaries  of  the  State.  The  climate  is  dry,  and  the  soil,  when 
moistened  only  by  the  usual  rainfall,  is  arid  and  unproductive;  except  in  a 
few  favored  sections,  artificial  irrigation  for  agriculture  is  an  absolute  neoes- 


14 


sity.  Water  in  the  various  streams  thus  acquires  a  value  unknown  in 
moister  climates.  Instead  of  being  a  mere  incident  to  the  soil,  it  rises,  when 
appropriated,  to  the  dignity  of  a  distinct  usufructuary  estate  or  right  of 
property.  It  has  always  been  the  policy  of  the  National,  as  well  as  the  Ter- 
ritorial and  State  Governments,  to  encourage  the  diversion  and  use  of  water 
in  this  country  for  agriculture,  and  vast  expenditures  of  time  and  money 
have  been  made  in  reclaiming  and  fertilizing  by  irrigation  portions  of  our  un- 
productive territory.  Homes  have  been  built  and  permanent  improvements 
made,  the  soil  has  been  cultivated,  and  thousands  of  acres  have  been  ren- 
dered immensely  valuable,  with  the  understanding  that  appropriations  of 
water  would  be  protected.  Deny  the  doctrine  of  priority  or  superiority  of 
right  by  priority  of  appropriation,  and  a  great  part  of  the  value  of  all  this 
property  is  at  once  destroyed. 

The  right  to  water,  in  this  country,  by  priority  of  appropriation  thereof, 
we  think  it  is  and  has  always  been  the  duty  of  the  National  and  State  Gov- 
ernments to  protect.  The  right  itself,  and  the  obligation  to  protect  it,  existed 
prior  to  legislation  on  the  subject  of  irrigation.  It  is  entitled  to  protection 
as  well  after  patent,  to  a  third  party,  of  the  land  over  which  the  natural 
stream  flows,  as  when  such  a  land  is  a  part  of  the  public  domain,  and  it  is 
immaterial  whether  or  not  it  be  mentioned  in  the  patent  and  expressly  ex- 
cluded from  the  grant. 

The  Act  of  Congress  protecting  in  patents  such  right  in  water  appropriated, 
when  recognized  by  local  customs  and  laws,  •'  was  rather  a  voluntary  recog- 
nition of  a  pre-existing  right  of  possession,  constituting  a  valid  claim  to  its 
continued  use,  than  the  establishment  of  a  new  one." 
Broder  vs.  Natoma  W.  &  M.Co.,  11  Otto,  274. 

We  conclude,  then,  that  the  commonl^law  doctrine  giving  the  riparian  owner 
a  right  to  the  flow  of  water  in  its  natural  channel  upon  and  over  his  lands, 
even  though  he  make  no  beneficial  use  thereof,  is  inapplicable  to  Colorado; 
imperative  necessity,  unknown  in  the  countries  which  gave  it  birth,  compels 
the  recognition  of  another  doctrine  in  conflict  therewith.  And  we  hold  that, 
in  the  absence  of  express  statutes  to  the  contrary,  the  first  appropriator  of 
water  from  a  natural  stream,  for  a  beneficial  pvirpose,  has,  with  the  qualifica- 
tion^ contained  in  the  Constitution,  a  prior  right  thereto  to  the  extent  of  such 
appropriation. 

See /Sc^eVZingr  vs.  Rominger,  3  Col.,  103. 

The  Territorial  Legislature,  in  1864,  expressly  recognizes  the  doctrine.     It 


"  Nor  shall  the  water  of  any  stream  be  diverted  from  its  original  channel 
to  the  detriment  of  any  miners,  millmen  or  others  along  the  line  of  said 
stream,  who  may  have  a  priority  of  right,  and  there  shall  be  at  all  times  left 
isnfficient  water  in  said  stream  for  the  use  of  miners  and  agriculturists  along, 
said  stream. 

Session  Laws  1864,  p.  58,  Sec.  32. 


15 


The  priority  of  right  mentioned  in  this  section  is  acquired  by  priority  of 
appropriation;  and  the  provision  declares  that  appropriations  of  water  shall 
be  subordinate  to  the  use  thereof  by  prior  appropriators.  This  provision 
remained  in  force  until  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution;  it  was  repealed  in 
1868,  but  the  repealing  Act  re-enacted  it  verbatim. 

But  the  rights  of  appellee  were  acquired  in  the  first  place  under  the  Acts 
of  1861  and  1862;  and  counsel  for  appellants  urge,  with  no  little  skill  and 
plausibility,  that  these  statutes  are  in  conflict  with  our  conclusion  that 
priority  of  right  is  acquired  by  priority  of  appropriation.  The  only  pro- 
vision, however,  which  can  be  construed  as  referring  to  this  subject,  is 
Section  4,  on  page  68,  Sess.  Laws  of  1861;  this  section  provides  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  commissioners,  in  times  of  scarcity,  to  apportion  the  water  of 
the  stream  *'  in  a  just  and  suitable  proportion,"  to  the  best  interests  of  all 
parties  concerned,  with  a  due  regard  for  the  legal  rights  of  all,"  What  is 
meant  by  the  concluding  phrase  of  the  foregoing  statute?  What  are  the 
legal  rights  for  which  the  commissioners  are  enjoined  to  have  a  "due 
regard?"  Why  this  additional  limitation  upon  the  powers  of  such  com- 
missioners? 

It  seems  to  us  a  reasonable  inference  that  these  phrases  had  reference  to 
the  rights  acquired  by  priority  of  appropriation.  This  view  is  sustained  by 
the  universal  respect  shown  at  the  time  said  statute  was  adopted,  and  subse- 
quently by  each  person  for  the  prior  appropriations  of  others;  and  the  cor- 
responding customs  existing  among  settlers  with  reference  thereto.  This 
construction  does  not,  in  our  judgment,  detract  from  the  force  or  effect  of 
the  statute.  It  was  the  duty  of  the  commissioners  under  it  to  guard  against 
extravagance  and  waste,  and  to  so  divide  and  distribute  the  water  as  most 
economically  to  supply  all  of  the  earlier  appropriators  thereof,  according  to 
their  respective  appropriations  and  necessities,  to  the  extent  of  the  amount 
remaining  in  the  stream. 

It  appears  from  the  record  that  the  patent  under  which  appellant,  George 
W.  Coffin,  holds  title,  was  issued  prior  to  the  Act  of  Congress  of  1866  here- 
inbefore mentioned;  that  it  contained  no  reservation  or  exception  of  vested 
water  rij^hts,  and  conveyed  to  Coffin,  through  his  grantor,  the  absolute  title 
in  fee-simple  to  his  lands,  together  with  all  incidents  and  appurtenances 
thereunto  belonging;  and  it  isrclaimed  that,  therefore,  the  doctrine  of  priority 
of  right  by  appropriation  cannot,  at  least,  apply  to  him.  We  have  already 
declared  that  water  appropriated  for  a  beneficial  purpose  is,  in  this  country, 
not  necessarily  an  appurtenance  to  the  soil  through  which  the  stream  sup- 
plying the  flame  naturally  flows;  if  appropriated  by  one  prior  to  the  patent- 
ing of  such  soil  by  another,  it  is  a  vested  right  entitled  to  protection,  though 
not  mentioned  in  the  patent.  But  we  are  relieved  from  any  extended  con- 
sideration of  this  subject  by  the  decision  in  JBroder  vs.  Natoma  W.  <fc  M.  Co.,. 
supra. 

It  is  urged,  however,  that  even  if  the  doctrine  of  priority  or  superiority  of 
right  by  priority  of  appropriation  be  conceded,  appellee  in  this  case  is  not 


16 


benefited  thereby.  Appellants  claim  that  they  have  a  better  right  to  the 
water,  because  their  lands  lie  along  the  margin  and  in  the  neighborhood  of 
the  St.  Vrain.  They  assert  that,  as  against  them,  appellee's  diversion  of 
said  water  to  irrigate  lands  adjacent  to  Left-hand  Creek,  though  prior  in 
time,  is  unlawful. 

In  the  absence  of  legislation  to  the  contrary,  we  think  that  the  right  to 
water  acquired  by  priority  of  appropriation  thereof  is  not  in  any  way  de- 
pendent upon  the  locus  of  its  application  to  the  beneficial  use  designed.  And 
the  disastrous  consequences  of  our  adoption  of  the  rule  contended  for,  forbid 
our  giving  such  a  construction  to  the  statutes  as  will  concede  the  same,  if 
they  will  properly  bear  a  more  reasonable  equitable  one. 

The  doctrine  of  priority  of  right  by  priority  of  appropriation  for  agri- 
culture is  evoked,  as  we  have  seen,  by  the  imperative  necessity  for  artificial 
irrigation  of  the  soil.  And  it  would  be  an  ungenerous  and  inequitable  rule 
that  would  deprive  one  of  its  benefit  simply  because  he  has,  by  large  expen- 
diture of  time  and  money,  carried  the  water  from  one  stream  over  an  inter- 
vening water-shed,  and  cultivated  land  in  the  valley  of  another.  It  might  be 
utterly  impossible,  owing  to  the  topography  of  the  country,  to  get  water 
upon  his  farm  from  the  adjacent  stream;  or,  if  possible,  it  might  be  im- 
practicable on  account  of  the  distance  from  the  point  where  the  diversion 
must  take  place,  and  the  attendant  expense;  or  the  quantity  of  water  in 
such  stream  might  be  entirely  insufficient  to  supply  his  wants.  It  some- 
times happens  that  the  most  fertile  soil  is  found  along  the  margin  or  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  small  rivulet,  and  sandy  and  barren  land  beside  the 
larger  stream;  to  apply  the  rule  contended  for  would  prevent  the  useful  and 
profitable  cultivation  of  the  productive  soil,  and  sanction  the  waste  of  water 
upon  the  most  sterile  lands.  It  would  have  enabled  a  party  to  locate  upon 
a  stream  in  1875,  and  destroy  the  value  of  thousands  of  acres,  and  the  im- 
provements thereon,  in  adjoining  valleys,  possessed  and  cultivated  for  the 
preceding  decade.  Under  the  principle  contended  for,  a  party  owning  land 
ten  miles  from  the  stream,  but  in  the  valley  thereof,  might  deprive  a  prior 
appropriator  of  the  water  diverted  therefrom,  whose  lands  are  within  a 
thousand  yards,  but  just  beyond  an  intervening  divide. 

We  cannot  believe  that  any  legislative  body  within  the  Territory  or  State 
of  Colorado  ever  intended  these  consequences  to  flow  from  a  statute  enacted. 
"Set  two  sections  are  relied  upon  by  counsel  asY)roducing  them.  These  sec- 
tions are  as  follows: 

•'  All  persons  who  claim,  own  or  hold  a  possessory  right  or  title  to  any  land 
or  parcel  of  land  within  the  boundary  of  Colorado  Territory  *  »  *  when 
those  claims  are  on  the  bank,  margin  or  neighborhood  of  any  stream  of  water, 
creek  or  river,  shall  be  entitled  to  the  use  of  the  water  of  said  stream,  creek 
or  river,  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating,  and  making  said  claims  available  to 
the  full  extent  of  the  soil,  for  agricultural  purposes."  Session  Law&i,  1861, 
p.  67,  Sec.  1. 

"Nor  shall  the  water  of  any  stream  be  diverted  from  its  original  channel 
to  the  detriment  of  any  miners,  millmen  or  others  along  the  line  of  said 


17 


stream,  &nd  there  shall  be  at  all  times  left  sufficient  water  in  said  stream  for 
the  use  of  miners  and  farmers  along  said  stream."  Latter  part  of  Sec.  13,  p. 
48,  Sess.  Laws  1862. 

The  two  statutory  provisions  above  quoted  must,  for  the  purposes  of  this 
discussion,  be  considered  together.  The  phrase,  "along  said  stteam,"  in  the 
latter  is  equally  comprehensive,  as  to  extent  of  territory,  with  the  expression 
"on  the  bank,  margin  or  neighborhood,"  used  in  the  former.  And  both  in- 
clude all  lands  in  the  immediate  valley  of  the  stream.  The  latter  provision 
sanctions  the  diversion  of  water  from  one  stream  to  irrigate  lands  adjacent  to 
another,  provided  such  diversion  is  not  to  the  "detriment"  of  parties  along 
the  line  of  the  stream  from  which  the  water  is  taken.  If  there  is  any  conflict 
between  the  statutes  in  this  respect,  the  latter,  of  course  must  prevail.  We 
think  that  the  "use"  and  "detriment"  spoken  of  are  a  use  existing  at  the  time 
of  the  diversion,  and  a  detriment  or  injury  immediately  resulting  therefrom. 
We  do  not  believe  that  the  Legislature  intended  to  prohibit  the  diversion  of 
water  to  the  "detriment"  of  parties  who  might  at  some  future  period  conclude 
to  settle  upon  the  stream ;  nor  do  we  think  that  they  were  legislating  with  a 
view  to  preserving  in  said  stream  sufficient  water  for  the  "use"  of  settlers  who 
might  never  come,  and  consequently  never  have  use  therefor. 

But  "detriment"  at  the  time  of  diversion  could  only  exist  where  the  water 
diverted  had  been  previously  appropriated  or  used;  if  there  had  been  no 
previous  appropriation  or  use  thereof,  there  could  be  no  present  injury  or 
"detriment." 

Our  conclusion  above  as  to  the  intent  of  the  Legislature  is  supported  by 
the  fact  that  the  succeeding  Assembly,  in  1864,  hastened  to  insert  into  the 
latter  statute,  without  other  change  or  amendment,  the  clause  "who  have  a 
priority  of  right,"  in  connection  with  the  idea  of  "detriment"  to  adjacent 
owners.  This  amendment  to  the  statute  was  simply  the  acknowledgement 
by  the  Legislature  of  a  doctrine  already  existing,  under  which  rights  had  ac- 
crued that  were  entitled  to  protection.  In  the  language  of  Mr.  Justice  Miller 
above  quoted,  upon  a  different  branch  of  the  same  subject,  it  "was  rather  a 
voluntary  recognition  of  a  pre-existing  right,  constituting  a  valid  claim,  than 
the  creation  of  a  new  one." 

Error  is  assigned  upon  alleged  defects  in  the  proof  of  appellee's  incorpora- 
tion. 

But  this  is  an  action  of  trespass;  the  defendants  below  were,  according  to 
the  verdict  of  the  jury,  and  according  to  the  views  herein  expressed',  wrong- 
doers; and,  considering  the  nature  of  the  action,  we  think  the  proof  of  incor- 
poration sufficient. 

The  judgment  of  the  Court  will  be  affirmed. 
2 


18 


The  Spirit  of  the  Press  on  the  Subject  of 
Irrigation. 


Kern  County  Californian. 

Proceeding's  of  the  Senate  Irrijjfatingf  Convention. 

In  our  last  issue  we  gave  a  sketch  of  the  proceedings  of  this  Convention, 
covering  the  first  day  of  the  session.  We  mentioned  that  when  the  Conven- 
tion convened  at  Riverside  last  year,  standing  committees  on  Resolutions 
and  Legislation  were  appointed,  to  report  at  the  present  meeting.  They  were 
not  ready  to  do  so,  and  it  was  agreecl  to  add  three  additional  members  to  each 
committee,  to  be  appointed  by  the  Chair.  The  writer  had  the  honot  to  be 
appointed  to  that  on  Resolutions.  The  two  committees  were  directed  to 
deliberate  and  act  together,  and  subsequently  they  were  combined  into  one. 
The  duty  of  this  combined  committee  was  to  prepare  the  work  of  the  Con- 
vention; to  decide  upon  and  prepare  the  points  upon  which  legislation  was 
required,  and  submit  their  work  to  the  Convention  for  discussion  and  ap- 
proval. As  James  DeBarth  Shorb,  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  was  also 
Chairman  of  the  Convention,  a  Vice-Chairman  was  appointed  to  preside  over 
that  body  while  he  attended  the  deliberations  of  the  committee.  The  com- 
mittee immediately  retired  to  a  room  prepared  for  the  purpose.  It  comprised 
18  members  and  we  were  surprised  at  their  intelligence,  ability  and  thorough 
Tinderstandiug  of  the  subject.  Several  of  them  were  able,  experienced  law- 
yers, three  were  editors,  and  the  rest  canal-owners  and  irrigators.  There  was 
no  hesitancy  about  proceeding  to  business.  E».ch  member  was  full  of  the 
subject,  and  more  work  was  proposed  than  could  have  been  accomplished  in 
a  month.  The  most  important  matters  were  selected,  such  as  were  believed 
"would  cover  the  entire  ground,  and  these  alone  acted  upon.  Nothing  was 
adopted  without  discussion,  or  until  all  opposition  was  overcome  and  a 
unanimous  vote  could  be  had.  Each  member  kept  steadily  in  view  the  wants 
and  interests  of  his  own  district,  and  as  it  was  not  always  possible  to  har- 
monize them,  a  great  deal  of  prolonged  and  warm  discussion  was  the  result, 
and  ^hile  there  was  some  not  fully  satisfied,  they  were  convinced  that  they 
could  not  have  been  granted  more  consistent  with  the  general  interest.  As 
the  work  progressed  it  was  reported  to  the  Convention,  and  last  Saturday  the 
final  report  was  made  and,  after  some  discussion,  the  work  of  the  committee 
was  adopted  unanimously;  whereupon  the  Convention  adjourned,  after  first 
perpetuating  the  committee,  which  divided  itself  into  variouo  departments 
for  diflferent  branches  of  work,  the  principal  of  which  are  the  Executive  and 
Finance  Committees,  the  latter  of  which  added  to  itself  several  members 
from  the  outside  whom  it  was  thought  could  render  essential  aid  in  this  de-' 


19 


partment,  and  a  meeting  of  the  entire  committee  was  had  subsequent  to  the 
adjournment  of  the  Convention,  at  which  a  definite  understanding  of  the 
work  to  be  done  was  had  and  final  arrangements  made.  The  amount  of 
money  necessary  for  immediate  use  was  estimated  and  apportioned  among 
the  counties  principally  interested  in  irrigation.  The  Executive  Committee 
was  assigned  the  task  of  framing  the  matters  adopted  by  the  Convention  into 
bills,  which  they  are  to  see  presented  simultaneously  in  both  Houses  of  the 
Legislature,  and  the  passage  of  which  they  are  to  urge  personally  by  every 
honorable  means  in  their  power.  The  bills  they  are  authorized  to  introduce 
will,  no  doubt,  effectually  settle  all  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  irrigation, 
especially  riparian  rights,  if  the  final  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  should 
sustain  them.  In  iiiht  event,  which  we  believe  is  not  unlikely,  a  way  has 
been  devised  to  get  them  out  of  the  way  and  apply  all  the  running  streams  of 
the  State  to  irrigation,  on  a  basis  of  justice  to  all  who  require  water  for  that 
purpose. 

The  following  are  the  ideas  adopted  by  the  committee  and  approved  by 
the  Convention,  which,  as  far  as  necessary,  are  to  be  shaped  into  bills  by 
the  Executive  Committee  and  their  enactment  into  laws  by  the  Legislature, 
urged : 

1st.  That  the  cubic  foot  per  second  be  adopted  as  the  unit  of  measure- 
ment throughout  the  State. 

2d.  It  is  important  and  desirable  to  institute  a  system  of  making  all  water 
rights  a  matter  of  proof  and  record. 

3d.  A  declaration  by  the  Legislature  that  all  the  waters  of  the  State  in 
natural  streams  and  lakes  belong  to  the  people,  and  are  subject  to  appropria- 
tion by  the  people  for  irrigation,  mining,  manufacturing;  and  other  useful 
purposes. 

4th.  To  provide  such  machinery  for  the  voluntary  formation  of  irrigation 
districts  by  which  the  owners  of  lands  may  acquire  water  rights,  and  assess 
the  land  for  the  purpose  of  constructing  canals,  ditches,  or  other  irrigation 
works,  ox  for  purchasing  those  already  constructed. 

Provided,  that  waters  already  appropriated  shall  thereafter  be  utilized  as 
at  present  through  existing  works  or  the  extension  of  the  same,  so  far  as  may 
be  necessary,  for  the  irrigation  of  lands  dependent  thereon;  and  further  pro- 
vided, thut  no  lands  shall  be  taxed  for  the  construction  of  works  of  irrigation, 
except  lands  actually  to  be  irrigated  by  said  works.  • 

5th.  To  so  extend  the  Law  of  Eminent  Domain  as  to  allow  an  irrigation 
district,  or  a  corporation,  outside  of  an  irrigation  district,  to  condemn  and 
pay  for  rights  of  way,  lands,  canals,  ditches,  and  water-claims  and  rights  of 
whatever  nature  held  by  any  person  or  corporation,  or  any  other  private  rights 
.of  property,  however  existing  or  acquired,  or  by  whatever  name  designated, 
which  may  be  necessary  for  the  appropriation  or  use  of  water. 

Provided,  that  in  condemning,  water  used  at  the  time  of  the  commencement 
of  an  action  for  the  same,  a  manifest  greater  public  interest  shall  be  shown. 


.    20 


[That  the  irrigation  district  with  power  to  condemn  is  defined  as  the  sub- 
district  within  the  hydrographic  district,  while  the  hydrographic  district  is 
one  without  condemnatory  power,  bnt  with  regulation  power  only.] 

6th.  To  provide  for  a  thorough  and  complete  annual  accounting  for  all 
the  waters  used  by  any  and  all  districts  or  companies,  and  lor  a  proper  dis- 
tribution of  the  waters  of  any  stream  between  appropriators,  and  for  such 
other  police  regulations  as  may  be  necessary. 

7th.  That  Section  1492  of  the  Civil  Code,  which  declares  that  the  rights 
of  riparian  proprietors  are  not  affected  by  the  preceding  twelve  sections  of 
the  Code  providing  for  rights  to  water  by  appropriation,  should  be  repealed, 
and  its  place  supplied  by  a  declaration  that  the  common  law  of  riparian 
rights  does  not  apply  to  this  State. 

8th.  That  a  change  should  be  made  in  the  law  of  limitations  as  regards 
diversions  of  water. 

9th.  That  the  committees  on  Legislation  and  Eesolutions  be  consolidated 
and  be  known  as  the  Legislative  Committee,  and  be  continued  in  existence 
after  the  adjournment  of  the  Convention,  with  power  to  draw,  or  cause  to  be 
drawn,  a  bill,  or  bills,  for  passage  by  the  Legislature,  according  to  the  prin- 
ciples embodied  in  their  report,  as  approved  by  this  Convention,  and  to  pre- 
sent the  same  to  the  next  Legislature  for  passage;  and  to  do  such  other  things 
as  they  deem  proper  to  effect  the  objects  of  this  Convention ;  and  with  power 
also  to  appoint  from  among  its  members  an  Executive  Committee,  with  the 
usual  powers  of  such  committee. 

The  following  was  adopted  as  their  views  of  law  by  the  committee  and 
approved  by  the  Convention: 

1.  Where  there  is  so  wide  a  diversity  of  opinion  as  now  exists  in  this 
State,  as  to  what  the  law  is  in  relation  to  water  rights,  it  is  clearly  the  duty  of 
the  law-making  power  to  so  improve  it  as  to  leave  it  free  from  all  ambiguity, 
and  render  it  definite  and  easy  to  be  understood  by  the  people  and  the 
courts. 

2.  That  the  Legislature  has  this  power,  is  made  plain  by  Section  2,  Article 
I,  of  the  Constitution,  which  reads  as  follows:  **  All  political  power  is  inher- 
ent in  the  people.  Government  is  instituted  for  the  protection,  security  and 
benefit  of  the  people,  and  they  have  the  right  to  alter  or  reform  the  same 
whencfver  the  public  good  may  require  it." 

3.  The  Constitution  of  our  State  recognizes  and  sanctions  the  appropria- 
tion of  water,  and  does  not  recognize  or  sanction  the  doctrine  of  riparian 
rights.  Its  language  is  as  follows:  •*  The  use  of  all  water  now  appropriated, 
for  sale,  rental  or  distribution,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  a  public  use,  and 
subject  to  the  regulation  and  control  of  the  State,  in  the  manner  to  be  pre- 
scribed by  law." 

4.  Title  8th  of  the  Civil  Code,  providing  for  the  appropriation  o^  water,  is 
the  law  of  the  State,  and  wherever  the  common  law  of  England  is  antagonist 


21 


tic  to  or  inconsistent  with  any  section  of  said  title,  it  has  no  force  or  effect 
as  law  in  this  State. 

5.  Law  is  defined  by  our  Code  as  "the  will  of  the  people  solemnly  ex- 
pressed."   The  language  of  the  Code  is  as  lollows: 

'  *  Section  4466.  Law  is  a  solemn  expression  of  the  will  of  the  supreme 
power  of  the  State. 

"Section  4467.    The  will  of  the  supreme  power  is  expressed — 

1.  By  the  Constitution. 

2.  By  the  Statutes. 

"  Section  4468.  The  common  law  of  England,  so  far  as  it  is  not  repugnant 
to  or  inconsistent  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  or  the  Consti- 
tution or  laws  of  this  State,  is  the  rule  of  decision  in  all  the  courts  of  this 
State. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  Governor  was  then  probably  engaged  in  the 
preparation  of  his  message,  it  was  agreed  to  call  his  attention  to  the  im- 
portance of  this  question  of  irrigation,  and  that  a  memorial  should  be  drawn 
up,  engrossed  and  sent  to  him  without  delay.  W.  S.  Green,  editor  of  the 
Colusa  Sun,  and  a  member  of  the  committee,  was  appointed  to  draw  up  such 
memorial.  He  performed  his  task  promptly,  and  his  work  was  approved  by 
the  committee  and  confirmed  by  the  Convention  as  follows: 

To  His  Excellency  George  Stoneman,  Governor  of  California:  Your  mem- 
orialist, the  State  Irrigation  Convention,  assembled  at  Fresno,  respectfully 
begs  leave  to  call  your  attention  to  the  great  value  of  the  interests  involved 
in  the  matter  of  irrigation,  to  its  importance  to  California  as  a  State,  and  to 
the  fact  that  much  remains  to  be  done  by  the  State  in  its  sovereign  capacity 
to  make  the  rights  of  irrigators  certain,  definite  and  secure,  and  request  that 
Your  Excellency  will  lay  the  same  before  the  Legislature,  with  such  recom- 
mendations as  in  your  judgment  shall  be  right  and  proper.  The  land  that 
must  be  irrigated  in  the  immediate  future  in  the  San  Joaquin  and  Sacra- 
mento valleys  embrace  an  area  of  not  less  than  5,000,000  acres.  This  area 
does  not  embrace  more  than  one-half  the  possibility  of  the  future.  There  is 
available  water  enough  to  supply  all  the  land.  Upon  a  very  large  portion  of 
this  area  the  rainfall  is  so  small  as  to  make  farming  an  impossibility  without 
iirigation,  and  upon  the  whole  of  it  the  rainfall  is  so  uncertain  as  to  prevent 
that  diversity  of  farming  so  necessary  to  the  prosperity  of  a  people.  Fur- 
thermore, all  the  counties  to  the  south  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  depend 
upon  irrigation  for  their  prosperity.  With  the  proper  encouragement  and 
security  given  to  irrigation,  millions  of  people  will  in  a  few  years  be  added 
to  this  great  and  fertile  territory;  but  with  irrigation  hampered,  thwarted 
and  destroyed  by  an  unfriendly  attitude  of  the  law-making  and  law-executing 
authorities  of  the  State,  the  present  population  of  this  territory  is  greater 
than  can  be  supported,  and  instead  of  adding  millions,  a  loss  of  tens  of 
thousands  must  be  suffered.  Notwithstanding  the  imperfections  and  uncer- 
tainty of  our  laws,  and  their  adverse  construction  by  our  Courts,  great  inter- 


22 


ests  have  grown  up  that  if  permitted  to  fall  through  must  blight  the  pros- 
perity of  our  State.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  enamerate  to  you  in  detail  all 
that  has  been  done.  In  Fresno  county  there  has  been  constructed  200  miles 
of  main  canal,  at  a  cost  in  round  numbers  of  $1,000,000,  irrigating  at  the 
present  time  394,000  acres  of  land.  Tulare  County  has  constructed  250  miles 
of  canal,  at  a|co3t  of  $1,000,000,  and  irrigates  200,000  acres  of  land.  Kern 
County  has  200  miles,  costing  about  $2,000,000,  and  irrigating  600,000  acres 
of  land.     Los  Angeles  County  has  in  operation  about   120  miles  of  canal, 

constructed  at  a  cost  of and  waters  60,000  acres  of  land.  San  Bernardino 

County  has  100  miles  of  canal  and  has  14,000  acres  under  irrigation,  costing 
$500,000.  Merced  County  has  in  course  of  construction  a  canal  with  a  ca- 
pacity of  3,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  upon  which  $500,000  has  been  ex- 
pended, and  it  will  require  $500,000  more  to  complete  it.  It  will  water 
360,000  acres.  These  lands  with  water  are  the  most  fertile  and  productive 
on  the  face  of  the  earth.  Without  it  they  are  arid  and  worthless.  In  other 
counties  of  the  State  there  are  other  works  either  contracted  or  in  course  of 
construction,  and  with  proper  encouragement  and  protection  these  works 
will  go  on  and  on  until  California  will  become  the  garden  of  the  world. 
These  irrigated  lands  are  divided  generally  into  small  farms  of  ten  to  forty 
acres,  and  upon  each  is  a  family,  contented,  prosperous  and  happy. 

To  give  you  some  idea  of  the  value  of  the  water  so  used  for  irrigation,  we 
have  simply  to  refer  to  the  fact  notwithstanding  the  adverse  circumstances 
above  set  forth,  water  rights  and  irrigable  lands  otherwise  of  no  value,  are 
worth  in  the  market  almost  fabulous  prices.  In  San  Bernardino  county 
there  are  two  ditches,  the  shares  in  which  are  selling  at  from  $800  to  $1200 
per  share,  each  share  being  equal  to  about  one  inch  of  water.  This  would 
make  the  water  worth  from  $40,000  to  $64,000  per  cubic  foot  per  second. 
Unimproved  land  at  Riverside  is  selling  at  from  $200  to  $800  per  acre,  with 
the  privilege  of  water,  while  land  with  no  immediate  prospect  of  water,  but 
equal  otherwise,  will  bring  but  a  nominal  price.  Those  are  by  no  means 
exaggerated  or  isolated  instances.  On  the  contrary,  with  the  fostering  care  of 
California's  sovereignty  and  power  rightly  and  judiciously  exercised,  giving 
encouragement  to  settlers  and  tillers  of  the  soil,  and  security  to  capital, 
that  portion  of  California  now  considered  valueless  for  farming  purposes  with- 
out irrigation,  will  become  the  most  densely  populated,  the  most  valuable 
portion  of  the  American  Continent.  Take  what  has  been  done,  even  under 
adverse  circumstances,  and  multiply  the  result  by  the  cubic  feet  of  water, 
and  the  acres  of  land  that  can  be  brought  together,  and  the  sum  almost  stug- 
gersthe  credulity  of  man,  and  the  recital  of  results  would  seem  more  like  an 
Arabian  tale  than  a  plain  statement  of  facts.  In  view  of  what  has  been  ac- 
complished; in  view  of  the  possibilities  of  the  future,  your  memorialist  feela 
that  it  is  not  asking  too  much  when  it  prays  for  the  support  of  the  power  of 
the  State,  and  the  enactment  into  statute  law  of  the  following  privileges  : 

1.  Making  the  cubic  foot  per  second  the  unit  of  measurement. 

2.  Making  water  rights  a  matter  of  proof  and  record. 


23 


3.  Declaring  that  all  the  waters  of  the  State  in  natural  streams  and  lakes 
belong  to  the  people,  and  are  subi'ect  to  appropriation  by  the  people  for  irri- 
gation, mining,  manufacturing  and  other  useful  purposes. 

4.  Providing  machinery  for  the  voluntary  formation  of  irrigation  districts, 
by  which  the  owners  of  land  may  acquire  water  rights,  and  assess  the  land 
for  the  purpose  of  constructing  or  purchasing  works  of  irrigation,  and  pro- 
serving  rights  already  acquired. 

5.  Extending  the  law  of  Eminent  Domain  so  as  to  allow  irrigation  dis- 
tricts or  corporations  outside  of  irrigation  districts  to  condemn,  take  and 
pay  for  right  of  way  lands,  canals,  riparian  claims,  and  such  other  private, 
or  corporate  property  as  may  be  necessary,  always,  however,  having  in  view 
the  greater  public  use. 

Providing  for  an  annual  accounting  for  all  the  waters  in  the  State  used  for 
irrigation,  and  for  a  proper  distribution  of  the  waters  between  appropriators, 
and  lor  such  other  public  regulations  as  may  be  necessary. 

The  following  was  adopted  to  bo  shaped  into  the  form  "of  a  memorial  to 
Congress: 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  desire  of  the  irrigators  of  California  that  theU.  S. 
Government  should  adopt  measures  to  preserve  the  water  sheds  and  sources 
of  supplies  of  the  springs  and  streams  now  used,  or  which  are  likely  to  be  used 
for  irrigation  in  California. 

Fires  in  the  mountains  should  be  carefully  guarded  against.  Ripe  timber 
Fhould  be  so  cut,  when  taken,  as  to  insure  a  second  or  new  growth,  and 
should  only  be  cut  in  such  quantities  as  will  not  materially  effect  the  melting 
of  the  snows  in  the  warm  season. 

Verdure  on  mountains  arrests  the  rains  and  water  percolates  into  veins  on 
which  the  springs  depend.  Forests  have  a  marked  effect  on  the  melting  of 
snow,  retarding  it  very  much,  so  that  snow  in  a  forest  which  would  be 
months  in  dissolving  and  running  off,  would  on  a  bare  hill,  under  like  tem- 
perature, disappear  much  more  rapidly  even  to  the  extent  of  creating  dis- 
astrous floods,  as  has  often  been  the  case  under  these  conditions. 

Carelessness  of  hunters,  shepherds  and  brush-burners,  and  the  natural 
demands  of  commerce  for  firewood  and  lumber,  must,  if  not  regulated,  make 
such  changes  in  the  reservoirs  of  our  mountains  and  so  diminish  their  water- 
holding  capacity,  as  to  seriously,  if  not  permanently  injure  the  agricultural- 
ists and  others  dependent  on  their  waters. 

We  therefore  urge  this  subject  to  the  attention  of  the  proper  authorities, 
especially  of  our  Sanators  and  C  ^ngressmen,  and  pray  for  their  favorable 
action. 

The  following  resolutions  were  adopted,  some  of  them  recommended  by 
the  Committee  and  others  proposed  directly  to  the  Convention  by  members 
of  that  body : 


24 


Resolved,  That  Dewey  &  Co.  be  employed  to  print  1000  copies  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  this  Convention,  in  pamphlet  form  for  the  sum  of  $100,  to  be  de- 
livered in  two  weeks. 

Resolved,  That  a  Finance  Committee  of  seven  be  appointed  to  raise  funds 
to  meet  expenses  incident  to  this  convention,  and  for  all  other  necessary 
expenses. 

Resolved,  That  Will  S.  Green  be  appointed  a  committee  of  one,  with 
authority  to  expend  a  sum  not  to  exceed  $150,  for  the  printing  and  circula- 
tion of  a  newspaper  supplement  containing  the  address  of  George  Church, 
and  the  reports  of  the  Joint  Committee  as  adopted  by  this  Convention. 

Resolved,  That  the  sincere  thanks  of  the  members  of  this  Convention  who 
have  come  from  a  distance,  are  due  and  most  cordially  tendered  to  the  citi- 
zens of  Fresno  for  the  many  courtesies  extended  and  the  attention  shown  to 
visitiiig  members. 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  this  Convention  prepare  a  petition  to  the 
State  Legislature,  setting  forth  the  principles  adopted  by  this  Convention  in 
guiding  its  Legislative  Committee  in  the  drafting  of  proposed  Legislative 
enactments,  and  asking  the  Legislature  to  favorably  consider  the  same,  and 
that  these  blank  petitions  be  circulated  through  the  State  with  a  view  to 
securing  the  largest  possible  number  of  names  to  the  same. 

Resolved,  That  this  Committee  would  earnestly  req  uest  that  all  friends  of 
irrigation,  now  members  of  this  Convention,  will  in  their  individual  capacity, 
visit  Sacramento  during  the  session  of  the  Legislature,  to  aid  and  assist  the 
Executive  Legislative  Committee  to  secure  such  legislation  now  demanded 
by,  not  only  every  irrigator,  but  also  by  every  true  citizen  and  lover  of  his 
State. 

Resolved,  That  any  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  who  may  not  be 
able  to  attend  the  meetings  of  such  Executive  Committee,  may  appoint  an- 
other member  of  the  Committee  on  Legislation  to  represent  him  at  such 
meeting. 

Resolved,  That  the  members  of  this  committee  are  authorized  and  requested 
to  use  all  proper  influence  in  obtaining  the  endorsement  of  all  public  bodies 
in  this  State  on  the  action  of  this  Convention. 

Resolved,  That  the  Chair  appoint  a  committee  of  three  to  proceed  to  San 
Fran(  isco  and  attend  the  meeting  soon  to  occur  of  the  Board  of  Trade  and 
Board  of  Irrigation  of  that  city,  there  to  represent  our  interests,  and  to 
obtain  their  aid  and  endorsement;  and  that  the  Chairman  of  the  Convention 
be  made  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee. 

Resolved,  That  we  recommend  that  the  office  of  State  Engineer  be  con- 
tinued, and  that  the  necessary  appropriations  be  made  by  the  next  Legisla- 
ture to  complete  the  work  already  cut  out,  and  such  other  work  as  may  be 
necessary  in  connection  with  the  duties  of  said  oflfice. 

Resolved,  That  the  thanks  of  this  Convention,  and  we  believe  we  hazard 
nothing  in  saying  the  thanks  of  every  one  connected  with  the  subject  of 


25 


irrigation,  are  most  heartily  tendered  to  the  present  incumbent  for  the  very 
able,  eflQ.cient  and  thorough  manner  in  which  the  work  has  been  conducted 
80  far,  and  believe  it  was  a  wise  and  fortunate  selection  when  the  duties  of 
the  office  were  committed  to  the  care  of  that  very  efficient  officer,  William 
Ham.  Hall. 

Resolved,  That  the  Chairman  of  this  Convention  appoint  a  committee  of 
three,  who  shall  examine  the  reporter's  transcript,  arrange  the  proceedings  of 
this  body  in  proper  order,  make  all  necessary  corrections,  and  turn  the  same 
over  to  the  publisher. 

Resolved,  That,  whereas,  the  Supreme  Court  has  ordered  a  rehearing  of 
the  water  case  recently  decided,  in  order  to  give  opportunity  for  others  than 
the  parties  to  the  suit  to  intervene  and  be  heard  before  a  final  decision  of  the 
case,  and 

"Whereas,  other  appropriators  are  preparing  to  represent  their  interests  be 
fore  that  Court;  and  whereas,  the  number  of  irrigators  is  as  a  hundred  to  one 
when  compared  with  the  appropriators. 

Resolved,  That  this  Convention  recommends  to  the  small  irrigators  of  the 
State,  whose  places  must  become  desolate  if  riparian  rights  prevail,  to  take 
measures  to  be  properly  represented  before  that  Court,  that  they  may  make  a 
final  appeal  for  a  fair  consideration  of  their  rights  before  their  ruin  becomes 
fiual. 

The  Executive  Committee  has  power  to  call  the  Convention  together  again 
whenever,  in  their  opinion,   it  shall  be  advisable.    A  motion  made  in  con- 
vention that  the  next  meeting  be  called  at  Sacramento  was  lost.     The  perma, 
nent  committees  appointed  to  act  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Convention 
are  composed  of  the  following  members: 

Executive.— J.  D.  B.  Sborb,  Los  Angeles;  F.  H.  Wharton,  Fresno;  H.  S. 
Dixon,  Fresno;  W.  S.Green,  Colusa;  L.  B.  Kuggles,  Tulare;  S.  M.  Holt, 
San  Bernardino;  E.  Hudnut,  Kern;  E.  H.  Tucker,  Fresno;  D.  K.  Zumwalt, 
Tulare. 

Committee  on  Boaed  or  Trade. — J.  D.  B.  Shorb,  Los  Angeles;  J.  W. 
North,  Fresno;  P.  Y.  Baker,  Tulare. 

Finance. — T.  Hughes,  Fresno;  J.  D.  B.  Shorb,  Los  Angeles;  C.  I.  F. 
Kitchener,  Tulare;  J.  G.  North,  San  Bernardino;  W.  S.  Green.  Colusa;  A. 
Weihe,  San  Francisco;  E.  Hudnut,  Kern;  Dr.  Eicker,  Merced. 


S.  F.  Alta.  • 

Paste  Tliis  in  Your  Hat. 

The  bill  to  make  irrigation  lawful  and  possible,  has  passed  the  Assembly 
by  the  following  vote: 

Ayes — Messrs.  Ashe,  Banbury,  Barnes,  Barnett,  Buhlert,  Carter  of  Contra 
Costa,  Clark,  Cook,   Corcoran,  Daley,  Deveny,  Da  Witt,  Dooling,  Franklin* 


French,  Goucher,  Gregory,  Hazard,  Henley,  Hnnt,  Hussey,  Johnson,  Jordan, 
Kalben,  Lafferty,  Long,  Loud,  Lovell,  May,  McDonald,  McGlashan,  McMur. 
ray,  Mears,  Moffit,  Munday,  Patterson,  Pellett,  Pyle,  Reeves,  Roseberry, 
Rubs,  Sullivan,  Swayne,  Torrey,  Van  Voorhies,  Watson  of  El  Dorado,  Ward 
of  San  Francisco,  Weaver,  Woodward,  Yule  and  Mr.  Speaker — 51. 

Noes. — Messrs.  Allen,  Colby,  Coleman,  Davis,  Ellison,  Firebaugh,  Heath, 
Henry,  Heywood,  Hollister,  Jones,  McJunkin,  Walrath,  Watson  of  Alameda, 
Ward  of  Batte,  and  Wood— 16. 

The  lead  which  Assemblyman  Jordan  took  in  the  filibustering  of  the  ene- 
mies of  irrigation,  together  with  his  notice  of  motion  to  reconsider  the  pas- 
sage of  the  bill,  given  for  the  purpose  of  delaying  the  transmission  of  the 
bill  to  the  Senate,  places  him  with  the  sixteen  "noes"  who  have  recorded 
themselves  in  favor  of  restoring  Southern  California  to  its  primeval  condition 
of  wilderness  and  desert.  Out  of  all  the  irrigation  measures  offered  to  the 
Legislature  for  consideration,  this  bill  alone  contained  assurances  which 
make  irrigation  possible.  A.11  other  bills  upon  the  subject  are  either  for  the 
regulation  of  the  use  of  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  the  adjudication  of 
conflicting  claims  to  water  for  the  same  purposes,  or  for  the  perpetuation  of 
foul  and  pestilential  swamps  of  the  great  basin  of  the  San  Joaquin  in  the  in- 
terest of  half  a  dozen  greedy  cattle  kings.  The  simple  question  presented  to 
the  Assembly  by  this  bill  was,  shall  the  waters  of  natural  streams  be  applied 
to  the  development  of  the  State  by  irrigation,  or  shall  they  be  confined  to 
their  channels,  so  that  such  water  as  is  not  lost  by  evaporation,  absorption 
or  dissipation  in  swampy  hog  wallows,  must  flow  useless  to  the  ocean?  Fifty 
Assemblymen  responded  to  these  questions  by  an  "aye,"  announcing  them- 
selves as  men  who  either  knew  the  necessities  and  demands  of  the  people,  or 
believed  that  the  people,  in  demanding  the  right  of  irrigation,  knew  their 
own  necessities.  Seventeen  out  of  eighty  of  the  assembly,  less  than  one- 
fourth  of  that  body,  declared  themselves  against  irrigation,  against  farming, 
fruit-raising,  viticulture  and  horticulture  in  Southern  California.  Every 
"no"  put  himself  on  the  record  against  encouraging  immigration  into 
Southern  California;  as  opposed  to  opening  up  the  magnificent  resources  of 
the  San  Joaquin  Valley;  as  opposed  to  preserving  to  ono-fifth  of  the  people 
of  the  State  the  fruits  of  many  years  of  industry;  as  favoring  the  abandon- 
ment of  the  irrigable  land  of  half  of  the  State  to  the  lizard,  the  horned  toad, 
and  the  burning  sun.  The  people  of  this  State  will  remember  the  fifty — 
neither  will  they  forget  the  seventeen.  The  first  roll-call  in  the  Senate  on 
this  bill  is  watched  for  with  interest,  and  will  be  a  companion  list  to  the 
above,  to  show  the  people  who  are  the  friends  of  State  progress,  and  who,  in 
defiance  or  disregard  of  public  need,  cast  their  votes  to  destroy  whole  com- 
munities of  people  and  bring  disaster  to  a  fair  land. 


27 


Kern  County  Californian. 

Tbe  Governor's  Messagfe  on  Irri^fation. 

The  Governor  sent  bis  message  to  the  two  Houses  of  the  Legislature  last 
Saturday,  which  after  being  partially  read  in  each  House,  the  further  read- 
ing, owing  to  its  great  length,  was  dispensed  with,  and  it  was  ordered  printed 
for  the  use  of  members.  It  is  a  well  written  paper  and,  although  of  unusual 
length,  nothing  in  it  appears  that  could,  with  due  regard  to  the  public  inter- 
ests, have  been  left  unsaid.  He  makes  many  wise  and  useful  recommenda- 
tions, few  of  which,  from  the  shortness  of  the  session  and  the  disposition 
of  Legislators  to  waste  time,  it  is  feared,  will  be  acted  upon.  It  is  a  surprise 
to  the  general  public  to  learn  that  the  finances  of  the  State  are  in  good  con- 
dition. He  shows  that  there  has  been  progressive  decrease  in  the  rate  of 
State  taxation.  If  the  railroads  would  pay  their  taxes  it  would  be  very  light 
in  future.  The  fact  is  mentioned  that  the  Controller  has  discovered  defalca- 
tions on  the  part  of  State  oflScers  amounting  to  $167,587.77,  and  in  this  con- 
nection, he  says: 

"Iwonld  recommend  that  additional  clerical  aid  be  furnished  the  Con- 
troller to  enable  him  to  prosecute  inquiries  in  other  directions,  the  force 
now  allowed  him  by  law  being  only  sufficient  for  the  performance  of  the 
usual  routine  work  of  the  office  during  office  hours." 

The  portions  of  the  message,  however,  that  chiefly  interest  the  people  of 
this  county,  are  the  following  : 

"The  subject  of  general  agricultural  irrigation  is  one  which  has  for  many 
years  been  gradually  but  surely  increasing  in  importance,  until  the  questions 
to  which  it  gives  rise  have  come  to  take  rank  as  leading  issues  in  our  State. 
And  since  the  prosperity  of  our  people  is  largely  dependent  upon  the  results' 
of  the  artificial  union  of  waters  and  soils,  it  becomes  my  duty  to  ask  your 
most  serious  attention  on  this  subject. 

"The  question  of  irrigation  is  not  a  local  one,  interesting  only  particular 
portions  of  our  State.  Our  climatic  surroundings  make  California  a  region 
where  artificial  watering  is  an  absolute  necessity  for  the  full  development  of 
our  agricultural  resources,  and  the  possible  requirements  and  support  of 
populations  such  as  exist  in  our  sister  States  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard.  There- 
fore, let  the  representative  of  no  county  consider  that  his  constituents  are 
not  closely  concerned  in  the  irrigation  problem,  for  all  agricultural  dis- 
tricts in  the  State  are  by  nature  irrigation  regions  of  some  type,  and  are  to 
be  developed  as  such  in  the  not  distant  future.  Every  community  has 
interests  more  or  less  directly  staked  upon  success  in  applying  waters  to 
thirsting  lands. 

"  It  is  clearly  evident  that  this  union  of  lands  and  waters  cannot  be  accom- 
plished under  a  law  which  gives  every  dweller  upon  the  bank  of  each  stream 
the  right  to  have  the  waters  flow,  as  by  nature  designated,  within  their 
banks. 

"  Our  Supreme  Court,  by  a  recent  decision,  has  declared  sach  law  to  exist; 
and  while  this  decision  is,  no  doubt,  in  accordance  with  the  law  as  it  now 


28 


-stands  on  our  statute  books,  it  appears  that  a  new  enactment  is  necessary  to 
meet  the  wants  of  our  people.  If  the  owners  of  the  stream  channels  own 
the  waters,  then  there  should  be  a  law  under  which,  after  due  compensation, 
these  waters  may  be  taken  and  used  in  irrigation.  Such  legislation  is  nec- 
essary, whether  the  irrigation  is  to  be  practiced  alone  on  bank  lands  or  on 
those  not  bordering  the  streams.  For,  as  the  right  to  hold  the  water  in  the 
streams  is  an  individual  one,  appurtenant  to  each  land  owner  on  the  bank,  it 
is  evident  that  one  property  owner  on  the  bank  has  it  in  his  power  to  defeat 
a  proposed  plan  of  irrigation  desired  by  the  entire  community  in  which  he 
resides. 

"The  issue  is  not  one  between  riparian  claimants  and  appropriators  of 
•water,  corporate  or  individual,  in  either  case,  but  between  the  outstretched 
plains,  from  river  to  river,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  lands  bordering  the 
river  channels  on  the  other.  Shall  the  waters  fructify  our  plains,  or  shall 
they  be  lost  in  the  sandy  beds  of  the  stream  channels,  or,  flowing  onward, 
be  lost  in  the  sea?  Our  Constitution  protects  the  rights  of  property,  and  our 
Courts,  in  accordance  therewith,  adjudicate  on  property  questions  as  between 
individuals.  The  duty  of  the  Legislature  is  to  provide  laws  such  as  will 
insure  the  prosperity  of  the  general  commonwealth. 

"  The  conflict  between  riparian  claimants  and  the  appropriation  interest  is 
not  the  only  problem  presented  by  the  irrigation  question.  There  is  another 
class  of  conflicts  which  are  continually  in  progress  between  the  different 
users  of  water,  and  which  are  only  kept  within  moderate  bounds  by  the 
apparent  necessity  for  appropriators  to  unite  and  make  common  cause 
against  the  riparian  interest.  These  clashings  are  the  result  of  the  defects 
in  our  water-right  system,  if  such  it  can  be  called,  which  accords  privileges 
without  requiring  sufficient  proof  and  adequate  rpcordation  of  the  fact  of  use. 
Eights  to  use  water,  under  our  Civil  Code,  are  mere  undefined  and  unproven 
claims,  the  extents  and  dates  of  which  are  known  only  to  their  holders  or 
claimants.  There  never  can  be  any  settled  conditio  a  of  affairs  in  the  irriga- 
tion interests  till  this  evil  is  remedied,  whatever  be  the  solution  of  the  prob- 
lem of  riparian  rights.  There  should  be  a  record  and  title  to  water  claims  as 
clear  and  indefeasible  as  to  land  holdings,  and  the  enactment  of  a  wise  law 
would,  in  my  opinion,  accomplish  this. 

**  Water-rights  being  definitely  adjusted,  determined  and  recorded,  the 
question  of  the  administration  of  the  streams  presents  itself  as  a  living  issue. 
Even  when  the  extent  of  individual  rights  is  clearly  known,  it  is  not  expected 
that  twenty  or  thirty  claimants  of  water,  under,  perhaps,  more  than  a  hun- 
dred claims  of  different  dates,  and  for  varying  amounts,  scattered  for  many 
miles  along  a  stream  which  is  continually  varying  in  volume,  will  be  able  to 
fairly  part  out  their  portions  of  the  water,  unless  there  is  some  authority 
which  will  compel  observance  of  the  law  and  obedience  to  administrative 
miction.  The  history  of  these  questions  uniformly  tells  us  that  such  rights 
must  be  administered  by  some  executive  power,  or  unending  litigation  and 
injured  interests  result,  until  the  strong,  overcoming   the  weak,  monopoly 


29 


of  waters  follow,  and  monopoly  of  land  is  the  final  re&nlt.  There  must  be- 
administration  of  streams  where  irrigation  is  practiced,  and  for  this  some 
carefully  devised  legislation  is  necessary.         »        *        ^^ 

"During  the  two  years  just  past  the  State  Engineer  has  been  chiefly  en- 
gaged in  completing  his  generaFreport  on  the  subject  of  irrigation,  together 
with  the  special  maps  of  the  State  heretofore  ordered  to  be  made.  His  work 
is  now  in  the  condition  wherein  publication  should  be  commenced." 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Tlie  Irrigation  Bills. 

The  prospect  of  legislation  on  the  water  question  looks  better.  The  House 
has  ordered  the  bill  creating  water  districts  to  be  engrossed,  by  a  vote  which 
shows  that  there  is  in  reality  no  serious  opposition  to  the  measure;  and  Bill 
210,  repealing  Section  1422  of  the  Code,  is  in  a  fair  way  to  become  a  law. 
The  representatives  of  the  Fresno  Convention  stick  to  their  notion  about  a 
Legislative  "  declaration  "  as  to  what  constitutes  the  law.  But,  after  all,  this 
idle  formaliiy  can  do  no  harm.  We  suppose  that  if  the  Legislature  should 
pass  a  bill  to  declare  that  two  and  two  make  four,  or  that  the  sun  rises  in 
the  east,  no  practical  mischief  would  follow. 

The  essential  point  is  to  provide  machinery  for  the  condemnation  of  water 
rights  by  the  State  in  the  name  of  the  people,  and  for  the  just  distribution 
of  water  after  it  has  been  acquired  for  a  public  use.  This  point,  it  is  be- 
lieved, is  measurably  secured  by  the  bill  which  was  engrossed  in  the  Assem- 
bly on  Thursday.  If  the  Senate  can  be  persuaded  to  act  promptly  in  accord 
with  the  House,  this  bill  alone  will  repay  to  the  State  the  cost  of  the  Legis- 
lative session.  What  is  needed  is  to  get  the  business  of  State  irrigation 
started.  Once  started,  it  can  be  improved  upon  and  modified  as  circum- 
stances dictate.  It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  we  can  establish  a  perfect  sys- 
tem of  irrigation  at  the  first  jump.  Other  countries  have  taken  centuries  to 
mature  their  systems. 

The  public  are  watching,  not  without  uneasiness,  the  course  of  the  Senate 
on  this  question.  It  is  known  that  the  riparian  owners  have  some  strong 
friends  in  that  body,  and  indications  have  not  been  wanting  that  certain 
Senators  are  prepared  to  adopt  an  obstructionist  policy,  doubtless  in  the 
interest  of  the  capitalists,  who  foresee  that  legislation  will  defeat  their  hopes^ 
of  securing  a  monopoly  of  water.  The  friends  of  irrigation  must  be  vigilant 
and  wary.  They  doubtless  control  a  majority  of  the  body,  but  their  objects 
may  be  defeated  by  parliamentary  tactics.  No  time  should  be  lost  in  passing 
Reddy's  bill  for  the  aquisition  and  distribution  of  water.  All  effort  should 
be  concentrated  on  this  measure,  to  the  exclusion  of  others  of  less  import- 
ance. When  machinery  is  provided  to  carry  out  the  great  principle  that  the 
water-ways,  as  the  highways,  of  the  State  belong  to  the  people  thereof,  irri- 
gation will  be  in  a  fair  way  of  becoming  a  practical  reality. 


30 


San  Francisco  Post. 

Tlie  Irrigratiota  Bills. 

Both  houses  of  the  Legislature  are  engaged  daily  in  considering  the  irriga- 
tion question,  and  endeavoring  to  formulate  a  law  practically  adaptable  to 
our  peculiar  local  conditions.  Under  the  decision  of  our  courts,  the  old  Eng- 
lish common  law  of  riparian  rights  has,  up  to  this  time,  held  good;  but  it  has 
been  plain  to  every  observing  citizen,  that  the  continuance  of  this  rule  would 
■work  great  injury  to  the  State  by  seriously  retarding  the  development  of  its 
resources.  Quite  a  number  of  bills  are  pending  before  each  of  the  legislative 
branches,  which,  though  they  differ  la  detail,  all  have  embodied  in  their 
scope  and  meaning  the  proposition  that  the  waters  of  running  streams  may  be 
utilized  for  irrigating  purposes.  The  riparim  owners  object  to  this  declara- 
tion, and  adduce  some  plausible  arguments  in  their  own  behalf.  They  assert 
that  they  purchased  their  lauds  at  a  comparatively  high  figure  because  of  their 
water  facilities,  which  entered  into  the  computation  of  the  value  of  the  prop- 
erty, and  that  it  is  not  fair  that  they  should  be  deprive.l  of  this  principal 
element  of  value.  We  do  not  understand  that  any  pending  bill  proposes  to 
absolutely  deprive  the  riparianist  of  such  water  as  he  may  need  for  his  farm- 
ing, manufacturing  or  domestic  purposes,  but  it  is  proposed  that  water,  which 
can  be  utilized  in  the  irrigation  of  lands  which,  without  it,  would  be  value- 
less, shall  not  be  permitted  to  go  to  waste  by  flowing  off  into  the  sea.  The 
first  thing  for  the  Legislature  to  do,  is  to  sit  down  emphatically  and  unmis- 
takably on  the  pretensions  of  the  riparianists  that,  because  they  own  strips  of 
land  on  the  banks  of  rivers,  the  waters  of  such  rivers  belong  to  them  alone. 
The  establishment  of  such  a  doctrine  would  retard  the  development  of  the 
State  indefinitely,  while  its  rejection,  and  the  legal  declaration  that  the 
waters  of  our  streams  shall  be  used  to  irrigate  our  lands,  would  correspond- 
ingly advance  it.  As  to  the  pending  bills,  their  respective  merits  and  the 
details  embodied  in  them  for  the  execution  of  various  systems,  are  matters  of 
comparatively  small  moment.  Let  the  principle  contended  for  by  the  irriga- 
tionists  be  thoroughly  established,  and  ail  will  be  well. 


s,    ^     San  Francisco  Examiner. 

A  Wolf  in  Sheep^s  Clothinif. 

Why  Senator  McClure's  filibustering  bill  to  establish  a  Commission  to  ex- 
amine and  report  upon  water  rights  and  irrigation  should  be  called  a  **com- 
promise,"  is  a  mystery  to  the  common  understanding.  The  riparianists  have 
always  favored  such  a  measure,  and  their  Sacramento  organ  advocates  it. 
Somewhat  more  than  six  years  have  elapsed  since  theoflSce  of  State  Engineer 
was  created  to  accomplish  the  same  object  which  it  is  now  proposed  to  effect 
through  a  Water  Commission.  A  vast  amount  of  valuable  information  has 
been  collected  by  Mr.  Hall,  a  portion  of  which  has  been  published  and  dis- 
trlbated,  and  the  balance  in  unpublished  form,  has  long  been  open  to  the  in- 


31 


epection  of  iuquiriug  legislators  and  others.     Only  the  negligent  or  wilfully 
ignorant  can  plead  want  of  information  upon  the  subject. 

It  may  be  admitted  that  the  irrigation  problem  in  its  entirety  is  intricate. 
It  is  not  unlike  all  other  questions  of  magnitude,  involving  large  detail.  No 
original  legislation  is  ever  expected  to  be  without  a  flaw.  The  most  that  can 
be  done  is  to  make  a  beginning,  from  which,  with  the  aid  of  practical  expe- 
rience, may  be  moulded  a  system  which  shall  in  the  course  of  time  become 
Buited  to  all  wants  and  adapted  to  every  necessity. 

The  whole  {State  favors  an  irrigation  law  which  places  all  laud  upon  an 
equal  footing,  regardless  of  its  situation.  The  dissenters  are  an  attenuated 
fraction  cf  riparian  owners  who  have  not  availed  themselves  of  the  right  of 
appropriation.  The  nature  of  most  of  our  streams  is  such  that  even  a  small 
quantity  of  water  cannot  be  diverted  without  sensibly  affecting^  the  flow  at 
some  point  on  the  stream.  No  half-measure  can  avail  irrigation.  The  utter 
and  complete  repudiation  of  the  English  common  law,  so  far  as  it  affects  this 
subject,  affords  the  only  avenue  of  escape  from  a  total  collapse  of  irrigation 
thronghout  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  State.  Localities  in  which  irriga- 
tion is  not  a  natural  want,  will  not  be  injuriously  affected. 

Such  of  the  riparian  owners  as  oppose  this  course,  shelter  themselves  under 
the  protecting  shadow  of  our  Constitution,  which  ordains  that  "no  person 
stall  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty  or  property  without  due  process  of  law," 
and  that  •'  private  property  shall  not  be  taken  without  just  compensation." 
They  should  not  be  denied  the  benefit  of  every  syllable  of  these  constitutional 
bulwarks  of  property.  But  there  is  another  provision  of  the  Constitution 
which  the  sovereign  people  of  the  State  have  made  the  law  of  the  land:  that 
the  use  of  water  for  sale,  rental  or  distribution  is  "  a  public  use,"  and  it  is 
this  provision  which,  while  according  the  rip.trian  owner  the  benefit  of  the 
guarantee  to  his  property  rights,  makes  it  possible  to  remove  him  from  the 
path  of  State  progress  upon  just  compensation,  by  due  process  of  law.  Six 
years  of  investigation  by  the  Slate  Engineer,  together  with  the  knowledge 
and  experience  of  those  who  have  given  irrigation  years  of  practical  study,  is 
enough  to  make  a  beginning  upon.  In  the  Wigginton  bill  there  is  safety  to 
irrigation  and  constitutional  protection  to  the  riparian  owner.  In  the  dis- 
trict bill  there  is  opportunity  for  experiment;  without  risk  of  injury  to  the 
irrigator.  There  are  other  measures  equally  important  and  necessary.  After 
their  passage  it  may  be  well  to  yoke  the  State  Engineer  with  a  Commission, 
or  constitute  a  separate  Commission,  and  endow  them  with  perpetual  suc- 
cession; otherwise  they  will  come  to  the  Legislature  every  two  years  for  an 
extension  of  time. 

By  McClure's  "compromise"  the  riparianists  get  the  kernel  and  the  irriga- 
tors the  shell.    In  a  contest  where  one  side  asserts   that  nothing  shall  be 
done  without  its  consent,  and  refuses  to  consent  to  any  action  whatever, 
there  is  no  such  word  as  compromise. 
3 


32 

San  Francisco  Alta. 

Riparian    Doirs-in-tlie-IIIaiigfer, 

The  small  band  of  cattle-owuers  who  are,  in  the  main,  owners  of  great 
tracts  of  pestilential  fever-breeding  swamps  in  the  Tulare  Valley  and  else- 
where, having  failed  to  "convince"  the  Legislature  that  southern  California^ 
should  be  destroyed,  are  now  at  it  tooth  and  nail  in  a  last  desperate  effort  to 
overcome  the  will  of  the  majority  in  both  Senate  and  Assembly  by  dilatory 
tactics. 

Filibustering  against  the  Irrigation  bills  is  the  order  of  the  day  with  the 
minority.  Powerless  to  defeat  the  desire  of  the  people,  by  specious  argu- 
ments to  their  faithful  representatives,  the  riparianists  now  hope  to  talk 
the  bills  to  death,  or  obstruct  their  consideration  by  proposing  other  unsat- 
isfactory measures. 

Since  a  riparian  owner  could  not  use  water  for  irrigating  his  own  lands, 
by  mere  force  of  his  riparian  right  it  might  reasonably  be  supposed  that  he 
would  favor  a  law  of  appropriation  by  which  he,  equally  with  all  others, 
could  divert  the  streams  from  their  channels.  But  no!  he  claims  that  it  is 
his  vested  right  to  have  the  stream  pursue  its  wonted  course,  and  he  must  be 
compensated  for  being  deprived  of  that  right.  The  new  Constitution  has- 
furnished  means  enabling  the  Legislature  to  provide  for  such  compensation 
by  the  first  clause  of  Section  1,  Article  XIV,  which  is  this:  "  The  use  of  all 
water  now  appropriated,  or  that  may  be  hereafter  appropriated,  for  sale, 
rental  or  distribution,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  a  public  use  and  subject  to 
regulation  and  control  of  the  State  in  the  manner  to  be  described  by 
law." 

It  is  under  this  constitutional  declaration  the  the  use  of  water  is  public, 
that  the  Wiggington  Irrigation  bill  and  the  Irrigation  District  bill  pro-' 
pose  to  permit  the  condemnation  under  the  law  of  eminent  domain.  Each 
of  these  bills  authorizes  the  purchase  from  the  riparian  owner,  of  water 
which  he  does  not  and  cannot  either  use  or  sell,  upon  making  just  compen- 
sation. To  the  fair  minded  man,  it  seems  that  if  there  is  any  injustice  or 
any  wrong  in  this,  it  is  not  to  the  riparian  owner. 

The  riparianist  having  first  said  that  it  is  unconstitutional  to  take  the  water 
tmless  by  paying  for  it,  now  claims  that  it  is  unconstitutional  to  take  it  and 
pay  him  in  the  face  of  the  constitutional  provision  just  quoted.  Nothing 
will  satisfy  him.  The  majority  should  take  the  reins  in  their  own  hands, 
and  not  suffer  the  obstructionists  to  kill  the  bills  just  on  the  eve   of  success. 


San  Francisco  Gall. 

Riparian  Rin^litg. 

Senator  Gross  said  in  a  debate  on  the  irrigation  bills  that  the  only  thing 
this  Legislature  can  do  in  regard  to  irrigation  is  to  repeal  the  riparian  doc- 
trine so  far  as  it  relates  to  lauds  patented  by  the  United   States  hereafter  ;■ 


33 


that  under  the  laws  of  the  nation  no  riparian  proprietor  can  be  deprived  of  his 
rights.  The  Nevada  County  Senator  assumes  in  effect  that  the  ownership 
of  the  water  running  through  a  tract  of  land  has  become  a  vested  right  of 
which  no  citizen  can  be  deprived.  Ihis  position  is  based  on  the  ground  that 
in  the  absence  of  statute  the  English  common  law  governs  in  the  matter. 
The  effect  of  this  position  is  that  a  man  who  has  perfected  a  title  to  a  tract 
of  land  through  which  happens  to  pass  a  stream  of  water  large  enough  to 
supply  a  city  or  irrigate  a  county  can  effectively  object  to  the  diversion  of  a 
portion  of  that  stream  from  its  natural  channel.  If  this  doctrine  had  been 
in  force  thirty  years  ago  the  county  which  Mr.  Cross  so  ably  represents  in 
the  Senate  would  have  retained  its  treasures  of  gold  until  the  present  time. 
Comparatively  little  of  its  mining  was  done  by  the  aid  of  water  in  its  natural 
channel.  Early  in  the  fifties  a  water  company  diverted  water  from  its  natural 
channel  wherever  it  could  be  found  and  conveyed  it  by  flume  and  ditch  to 
the  gold-bearing  hills  of  Nevada  County.  The  use  of  the  water  so  diverted 
made  Nevada  at  an  early  period  in  the  history  of  the  State  one  of  the  most 
noted  mining  counties.  The  plea  of  vested  rights  can  hardly  be  set  up  as  an 
assumption.  California  has  necessarily  nothing  to  do  with  the  common  law 
of  England.  The  conditions  which  determine  the  equities  in  the  use  of 
water  are  quite  different  in  the  two  countries.  A  person  purchasing  land  in 
California  upon  the  assumption  that  English  common  law  would  govern  the 
use  of  water  does  so  at  his  own  risk.  A  positive  statute  might  at  any  time 
set  the  common  law  aside.  The  dominant  consideration  in  the  determination 
of  this  water  question  is  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number.  The 
State  has  a  right  to  make  any  laws  to  govern  the  use  of  water  which  it  deems 
to  the  greatest  benefit  of  its  citizens  as  a  body.  The  individual  rights  which 
the  law  must  respect  are  the  rights  acquired  under  law.  It  is  monstrous  to 
assume  that  a  person  on  the  strength  of  holding  a  tract  of  land  should  possess 
the  right  to  withhold  from  a  large  body  of  people  an  essential  of  their  exist- 
ence. The  law  would  confer  no  such  right  in  a  country  where  such  abuse 
could  be  made  of  it.  The  common  law  of  England  was  the  result  of  centuries 
of  obvervation  and  practice,  and  was  adapted  to  the  conditions  prevailing  in 
that  country.  The  conditions  prevailing  in  this  country,  if  prevailing  at  the 
time  in  that,  would  have  prevented  any  such  system  of  laws  to  govern  the 
use  of  water. 


Sacramento  Record-Union. 

Tlie  Irrlg'ation  Contest. 

The  people  are  agreed  upon  the  need  for  an  irrigation  system,  and  are  all 
of  one  mind  concerning  the  use,  for  irrigation,  of  all  waters  that  can  be 
diverted  to  that  purpose,  consistently  with  the  best  interests  of  the  State  and 
all  its  citizens.  When  we  come  to  methods,  it  is  discovered  to  be  the 
most  difficult  problem  for  solution  that  has  yet  presented.  But  we  have 
faith  that  it  will  be  solved.  The  future  of  the  valleys  needing  irrigation. 
Tinder  a  wise  system  of  use  of  the  waters,  will  be  one  of  the  greatest  possi- 


34 


bilities,  wealth  and  prosperity.  Where  we  uow  have  hundreds  of  homes,  we 
shall  have  thousands;  where  we  now  have  one  consumer,  we  shall  have  fifty 
or  a  hundred.  Every  interest,  commercial  and  industrial,  will  be  advanced, 
and  all  the  people  will  be  benefited.  But  not  even  this  glowing  future  can 
bo  realized  at  the  expense  of  the  destructiou  of  the  navigable  streams.  They 
are  necessary  for  commercial  uses  and  sanitation;  they  secure  to  the  interior 
commercial  advantages  not  otherwise  obtainable;  they  cheapen  transportation; 
they  build  up  trade;  they  are  free  highways,  the  heritage  of  all  the  people. 
Let  our  friends  the  irrigators,  who  declare  that  they  do  not  propose  or  wish 
to  take  as  much  as  a  thimblefall  of  water  from  the  Sacramento  Eiver  to  the 
impairment  of  navigatiou,  aflBrmatively  express  in  their  bill  that  nothing  in 
the  irrigation  legislation  shall  be  construed  as  the  exercise  of  sovereignty 
to  the  injury  of  navigable  streams,  and  they  will  have  won  to  their  position 
whatever  of  influence  may  have  heretofore  been  timid  about  pronouncing  for 
them  on  this  account. 

Stockton  Independent. 

Wbat  Irri^fatlon  -would  do. 

An  exchange  remarks  that  there  are  five  million  acres  of  land  in  the  Sac- 
ramento aud  San  Joaquin  valleys  susceptible  of  irrigation  by  a  well-planned 
system  of  canals.  The  same  paper  goes  on  to  say  that  **  if  these  lands  were 
so  irrigated  they  would  produce  from  fifty  dollars  to  three  hundred  dollars 
an  acre  annually  each,  but  say  one  hundred  dollars,  averaging  between 
alfalfa  and  grapes,  this  would  give  a  yearly  product  of  five  hundred  million 
dollars."  This  is  not  an  extravagant  estimate.  But  the  land  must  be  irri- 
gated in  order  to  be  made  productive.  California  is  capable,  or  rather  could 
be  rendered  capable,  of  supporting  a  much  larger  population  than  that  of  the 
entire  New  England  States,  but  in  order  to  make  that  possible,  our  industrial 
system  must  undergo  a  very  radical  change^  Irrigation  would  not  only  make 
the  cultivation  of  green  crops  possible  but  profitable,  and  the  culture  of  such 
crops  would,  as  a  matter  of  course,  increase  the  demand  for  agricultural 
laborers.  It  is  commonly  admitted  that  a  well  regulated  system  of  irrigation 
must  be  established  before  the  agricultural  resources  of  the  State  can  be 
fairly  developed. 

The  Oakland  Daily  Times. 

The  irrigation  legislation  which  is  pending  at  Sacramento,  is  of  intense 
interest  to  the  arid  sections  of  the  State,  and  it  should  become  a  law. 


Los  Angeles  Express. 

The  straggle  now  in  progress  in  both  branches  of  the  Legislature  upon 
the  subject  of  water  rights  is  one  of  immense  importance.    It  constitutes  an 


35 


attempt  to  legally  define  the  rights  of  riparian  owners,  and  owners  by  appro- 
priation— to  draw  the  precise  line  between  the  two,  showing  where  the  one 
commences  and  the  other  ends.  The  riparian  owners  claim  the  right  to  all 
the  water  in  the  streams  running  through  or  in  front  of  their  lands.  The 
owners  by  appropriation  claim  the  right  to  divert  water  from  the  running 
streams  to  irrigate  lands  back  of  the  streams,  and  not  bordering  upon  them. 
As  the  number  of  people  who  are  served  by  appropriation  is  many  times  as 
great  as  that  of  the  riparians,  and  as  the  principle  of  appropriation  is  mani- 
festly the  principle  of  "the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,"  and  is  the 
principle  upon  which  vast  sections  of  the  State  have  been  redeemed  from  a 
■wilderness  to  a  garden  of  beauty  and  luxuriance,  it  is  the  one  which  ought  to 
prevail.  The  people  will  be  represented  in  this  Legislative  fight  by  those 
who  advocate  the  idea  of  appropriation;  the  riparians  will  be  represented  by 
their  money.  It  will  probably  be  found  that  the  strength  of  the  latter  will  be 
found  mainly  in  the  city  of  San  Francisco,  whose  members  are  but  little 
affected  in  the  matter  one  way  or  the  other. 


The  Visalia  Weekly  Delta. 

Irrigation. 

The  Sacramento  Capital,  which  still  continues  to  work  manfully  in  the 
interest  of  irrigation,  referring  to  work  in  the  committees,  says: 

''The  Irrigation  Committee  men  have  been  hard  at  work  all  the  week,  but  it 
is  very  much  feared  that  the  riparian  men  have  captured  the  Legislature,  as  it 
is  a  fact  that  they  are  spending  a  great  deal  of  money  to  defeat  the  most  impor- 
tant measure  that  has  come  before  the  body  during  this  session.  It  is  a  well 
known  fact  that  the  appropriators  have  but  little  or  no  money  to  spend  on 
the  fight,  as  they  represent  the  boue  and  vim  of  the  southern  part  of  the 
State,  while  the  large  landholders  ave  backed  by  some  of  the  wealthiest  cor- 
porations in  the  State.  If  the  bill  does  not  pass,  the  people  may  rest  assured 
that  money  defeated  it." 

We  are  not  ready  to  believe  that  a  majority  of  both  houses  have  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  those  who  have  combined  to  defeat  the  bills,  when  so  great  an 
effort  is  being  made  to  set  the  matter  before  the  Legislature  in  its  true  light. 
The  question  has  been  so  thoroughly  discussed  of  late  and  so  much  informa- 
tion regarding  it  has  been  placed  in  the  hands  of  members  of  both  houses, 
that  we  are  still  hopeful  of  good  being  accomplished. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

Colossal  Misstatements. 

Last  Wednesday  evening  the  "ripariauists"  and  their  attorneys  appeared 
before  the  Joint  Irrigation  Committee  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly,  and,  if 
the  Examiner  reports  them  correctly,  they  made  some  very  gross  misstate- 


36 


ments.  Senator  Cox,  of  Sacramento,  however,  loomed  up  as  the  colossus  of 
the  occasion,  and  made  for  himself  a  record  worthy  of  Eli  Perkins,  Tom  Ochil- 
tree, or  Annanias  of  old.  He  is  reported  by  the  Examiner  as  saying  that  "he 
■was  one  of  those  owning  190,000  acres  of  land  on  King's  river,  and  because 
of  a  diversion  of  the  water  above  this  land  last  year,  he  lost  5,003  head  of 
cattle,  and  Miller  &  Lux  lost  10,000  hea3."  The  statement  is  absolutely 
false.  We  do  not  believe  that  Senator  Cox  had  5,000  head  of  cuttle  depend- 
ent on  King's  river  for  water,  and  we  know  that  Miller  &  Lux  did  not  have 
any  that  were  so  dependant.  Cox  &  Clark  drove  all  their  cattle  out  of  Tu- 
lare and  Fresno  counties  after  the  passage  of  the  no  fence  laws,  while  Miller 
&  Lux  have  their  cattle  on  their  ranches  on  Kern  Island  and  the  San  Joaquin. 
More,  neither  of  these  parties  lost  a  single  animal  last  year  because  the 
waters  of  King's  River  were  diverted.  Water  ran  in  the  river  the  entire  sea- 
son, and  the  swamps  were  overflowed  much  of  the  season.  Bat,  admitting 
that  all  the  water  had  been  turned  out  of  the  river,  and  there  was  a  scarcity 
in  consequence,  what  must  the  Legislative  Committee  think  of  men  who 
would  let  fifteen  thousand  head  of  cattle  perish  with  thirst  when  a  few  hun- 
dred dollars  would  have  bored  wells  from  which  an  abundance  of  water 
could  be  obtained.  The  cause  of  the  riparianists  must  indeed  be  weak  when 
it  has  to  be  bolstered  up  by  such  absurdities.  This  riparian  struggle  is  the 
dying  kick  of  the  cattle  kings. 

The  facts  are,  and  it  can  be  shown  to  the  world,  that  nine-tenths  of  the 
owners  of  land  along  the  King's  and  San  Joaquin  rivers  are  in  favor  of  the 
appropriation  of  water  for  irrigation. 

The  Sacramento  Bee  has  taken  the  side  of  the  riparianists  in  the  present 
contest  before  the  Legislature,  and  is  working  with  might  and  main  to  pre- 
vent just  laws  from  being  enacted.  Whether  it  will  have  any  influence  or 
not,  we  cannot  say,  but  certainly  in  a  course  so  unholy  its  efforts  should 
fall  flat.  The  people  of  southern  California  and  the  San  Joaquin  and  Sacra- 
mento Valleys  must  have  laws  passed  that  will  protect  them  in  their  rights, 
and  stop  the  hampering  of  the  riparianists;  and  right  here  I  will  say  that 
any  member  of  the  Legislature  who  fails  to  stand  up  square  on  this  vital 
issue  will  be  marked,  and  few  and  far  between  will  be  the  votes  he  will  get  in 
the  southern  counties  should  he  ever  come  before  the  people  asking  for  office. 


Fresno  Republican. 

Slovr  to  Grasp  It. 

Never  before  in  the  history  of  our  newspaper  experience  have  we  felt  so 
entirely  powerless  to  do  justice  to  a  subject  as  we  feel  in  the  presence  of  the 
great  irrigation  problem  in  California.  We  have  thought  of  it  much,  and 
have  given  it  all  the  investigation  that  opportunity  aflforded,  but  as  we  pro- 
gress, "hills  peep  o'er  hills  and  Alps  on  Alps  arise."  There  are  only  about  a 
million  of  people  in  California  now,  but  when  we  have  added  a  million  to 
our  irrigated  or  irrigable  districts,  a  commencement  will  only  have  begun! 


37 

We  have  blamed  the  men  in  charge  of  the  big  newspapers  of  the  State  for 
not  having  grasped  the  situation;  for  devoting  page  after  page,  telling  how 
Miss  Smith,  who  visited  Mrs.  Jones,  was  dressed,  and  begrudging  the  occa- 
sional eighth  column  notice  of  some  grand  irrigation  system;  but  it  is  so 
grand,  so  magnificent  in  its  proportions,  as  to  deter  the  ordinary  thinkerfrom 
approaching  it  at  all. — Colusa  Sun. 

The  Republican  has  not  so  much  wondered  that  the  country  press  of  the 
State  in  localities  where  irrigation  is  an  undemonstrated  possibility,  has  been 
slow  in  realizing  its  importance  to  the  State,  for  the  first  and  principal  duty 
of  the  local  journal  is  to  look  after  the  interests  of  its  own  county  and  com- 
munity, and  in  many  cases  the  country  journalist  has  not  the  opportunity  to 
learn  by  observation,  and  comparison  of  his  own  with  other  localities,  what 
is  most  needed  to  advance  and  develop  the  resources  that  may  exist;  but  dur- 
ing the  several  years  past  that  irrigation  has  been  a  demonstrated  success  in 
several  portions  of  California,  the  lack  of  interest  manifested  by  the  metro- 
politan press  has  been  a  constant  source  of  surprise  to  us,  and  this  feeling  has 
been  shared  by  the  people  of  all  the  irrigated  portions  of  the  State  and  all  oth- 
•ers  who  have  observed  the  results  of  irrigation.  All  the  encouragements  given 
to  irrigation  by  the  daily  papers  has  been  exceeded  by  the  attention  they 
have  devoted  to  other  subjects  of  not  one-bundreth  part  the  importance. 
Although  it  has  been  for  a  number  of  years  past  shown  beyond  all  question 
in  the  irrigated  districts  of  Fresno,  Riverside  and  those  of  lesser  importance, 
that  by  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation,  many  of  the  vast  and  comparatively 
unproductive  valleys  of  California  can  be  made  perfect  garden  spots,  marvel- 
ously  productive  of  fruit,  wine,  raisins  and  all  agricultural  products,  and 
capable  of  supporting  a  population  of  millions  inste'ad  of  hundreds  as  now, 
when  the  irrigators  of  the  State  have  gone  before  the  Legislature  asking  that 
the  laws  be  so  amended  that  they  will  encourage  and  not  prohibit  irrigation, 
the  leading  papers  of  the  Coast  have  either  been  non-committal  or  given  the 
cause  of  irrigation  a  very  conservative  support. 

It  is  amazing  that  among  the  prominent  metropolitan  journalists  of  this 
coast,  with  all  their  facilities  for  gathering  facts  concerning  the  existing  con- 
ditions, there  has  not  been  one  possessed  of  the  necessary  comprehension  to 
discover  that  irrigation  is  to  be  the  paramount  factor  in  the  development  of 
this  State  from  its  present  uncertain  and  unsatisfactory  system  of  agricul- 
ture to  one  of  the  richest  and  most  densely  populated  agricultural  regions  of 
the  world. 

Very  recently,  since  the  session  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention  at 
Fresno,  some  of  these  papers,  notably  the  Alta,  Chronicle  and  Fosi,  seem  to 
have  partially  awakened  to  a  sense  of  the  gravity  and  importance  of  the 
question.  Whether  they  have  come  to  a  sufficient  realization  of  its  impor- 
tance to  use  their  influence  in  securing  the  necessary  legislation  at  the  ap- 
proaching session  of  the  Legislature,  remains  to  be  seen.  We  are  inclined  to 
■believe  they  will,  for  public  sentiment  has  been  so  educated  in  regard  to  this 
matter  without  the  assistance  of  the  press,  that  we  believe  that  power  will 
now  find  it  necelftsary  to  champion  the  long  neglected  cause  of  irrigation. 


38 


The  necessity  of  legislation  must  be  apparent  to  all.  Under  the  ruling  of 
the  Courts,  the  present  law  prohibits  inigation,  and  would  not  only  raise  an 
impassable  barrier  to  the  reclamation  of  thousands  of  acres  from  their  present 
condition  of  barrenness  or  unprofitable  cultivation  to  the  highest  possible 
state  of  productiveness,  but  would  destroy  all  that  has  been  accomplished  in 
building  up  the  most  prosperous,  densely  populated  and  altogether  most  de- 
sirable portions  of  the  State  of  California. 


Los  Angeles  Daily  Herald. 

So  far  the  irrigation  bill  has  made  good  progress  in  the  Assembly.  It  will 
be  remembered  by  readers  of  the  Herald  that  two  bills  of  this  kind  bad  been 
introduced,  but  the  one  now  referred  to  is  that  which  was  prepared  by  the 
Fresno  Convention.  On  the  introduction  of  this  bill,  the  great  advantages  it 
possesses  over  the  others  were  so  manifest,  that  it  was  determined  to  let  these 
two  lie  on  the  table.  One  of  the  main  features  of  the  bill  is  the  doctrine  that 
the  common  law  of  England  and  the  United  States  concerning  riparian  rights 
should  not  be  applicable  in  this  State,  and  common  sense  would  lead  one  giv- 
ing sane  attention  to  the  matter  to  the  same  conclusion.  On  Thursday  last, 
and  again  on  Friday,  Assemblyman  Walrath  moved  that  the  bill,  which  had 
been  reported  on  favorably  by  the  committee,  be  taken  up  out  of  order  and 
read  for  the  first  time.  His  second  motion  was  carried,  and  the  bill  was  made 
a  special  o^der  for  to-day.  The  proceedings  of  the  State  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion held  at  Fresno,  whi§h  were  reported  at  the  time  in  these  columns,  are  so 
well  known  to  the  readers  of  this  journal,  that  it  is  lict  necessary  now  to  do 
more  than  refer  to  them.  That  Con\ention  was  composed  not  of  mere  theo- 
rists, as  some  of  those  who  went  as  delegates  to  the  Riverside  Convention 
were,  but  in  the  main  of  gentlemen  who  discussed  the  question  from  a  stand- 
point they  have  taken  after  many  years  of  thorough  practical  acquaintance 
"with  irrigation  in  California,  aud  wLat  it  can  and  should  be  made.  Just  as 
the  meteorological  phenomena  of  California,  its  climate  and  its  various  soils 
differ  from  those  of  other  lands  where  irrigation  is  practiced,  just  so  the  law 
of  riparian  rights  of  other  countries  may  very  well  be  inapplicable  to  our 
State.  At  Fresno  the  subject  received  full  consideration,  and  it  is  very  rea- 
sonable to  suppose  that  the  bill  under  discussion  as  these  lines  are  being 
•written  will  become  a  law. 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

A  Burnlnjif  Qaestion. 

One  of  the  objects  of  the  proposed  legislation  upon  the  subject  of  irrigation 
is  to  establish  the  doctrine  that  the  water  of  streams  can  be  used  for  the  pur- 
pose of  irrigation.  The  "riparianists,"  so  called,  claim  the  right  to  have  the 
waters  of  natural  streams  flow  in  their  natural  channels  without  diminution. 


39 


The  irrigators,  or  appropriators,  assert  that  the  first  who  appropriates  and 
applies  water  from  a  stream  to  a  useful  purpose,  has  the  better  right. 

The  former  class  is  composed,  chiefly,  of  a  few  cattle-raisers,  who  pretend 
that  the  waters  of  natural  streams  should  be  devoted  to  watering  cattle,  and 
that  what  is  not  so  used  should  flow  untouched  to  the  sea. 

The  irrigators  comprise  the  thousands  of  people,  many  of  them  with  fami- 
lies, who,  learning  of  tbe  great  fertility  of  the  soil  ot  Southern  California 
and  of  the  marvelous  variety  of  products  which  will  flourish  there  by  means 
of  irrigation,  have  purchased  lands,  constructed  ditches  and  canals,  and 
appropriated  the  waters  of  streams  for  irrigation  purposes;  also  other  thou- 
sands who  have  followed  the  increase  of  population  with  the  various  busi- 
ness enterprises  and  employments  necessary  to  the  existence  of  civilized 
communities. 

Passing  by  the  legal  propositions  involved,  among  the  questions  to  deter- 
mine are:  What  are  the  relative  necessities  of  the  people  of  that  section?  To 
whom  will  the  greatest  benefit  inure,  or  evil  result,  by  the  giving  to  the  peo- 
ple the  right  to  irrigate  their  lands? 

On  the  one  hand,  if  the  farmers  and  fruit-raisers  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley 
and  the  southern  portion  of  the  State  are  to  be  deprived  of  the  privilege  of 
diverting  water  for  irrigation,  their  property  becomes  valueless.  Crops  cannot 
be  raised  nor  fruit  cultivated  there  without  irrigation.  All  of  the  land  now 
cultivated  must  be  abandoned. 

Valuable  products,  which  might  have  been  raised  in  immense  quantities, 
will  never  enrich  the  State.  The  vineyards  and  orchards  will  perish  of  thirsts 
The  parched  lands  will  no  longer  exchange  its  fruits  for  water.  The  property 
which  has  hitherto  added  so  Urgely  to  the  wealth  of  the  State  and  the  pros- 
perity of  this  city  will  no  longer  exist.  The  populous  towns  which  have  been 
built  along  the  line  of  the  railroad,  in  the  center  of  thriving  communities  of 
farmers,  will  become  "deserted  villages." 

The  well-to-do  will  become  poor,  and  the  poor,  paupers. 

But  the  roving  cattle-owner  .will  water  his  cattle  in  the  streams.  The  for- 
tunate owner  of  land  upon  the  banks  of  natural  water-courses  will  be  enabled 
to  obtain  river  water  with  which  to  wash  his  dishes,  and  indulge  in  the  pleas- 
ure of  gazing  upon  the  waters  rushing  to  the  ocean  through  millions  of  acres 
of  desert  and  wilderness,  which  need  but  irrigation  to  smile  into  gardens, 
vineyards  and  orchards,  bringing  forth  every  known  variety  of  flowers,  fruits 
and  grains. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  right  of  diversion  of  water  for  irrigation  be  given 
to  those  who  have  heretofore  appropriated,  and  to  such  as  may  hereafter 
desire  to  appropriate  it,  the  labor  and  industry  of  years  will  be  saved  to 
those  who  have  well  earned  the  right,  and  the  millions  of  acres  yet  unoc- 
cupied and  unimproved  will  be  taken  up,  irrigated,  and  made  fruitful  by 
hundreds  of  thousands,  even  millions  yet  to  come. 

And,  compared  to  the  injury  sustained  from  want  of  water  by  the  farmers 
and  others  directly  and  indirectly  intei'ested  in  irrigation,  the  loss  to  cattle-^ 


40 


owners  from  the  abolition  of  the  riparian  doctrine  would  be  trivial  and 
easily  compensated. 

The  entire  basin  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  carries  water  near  the  surface. 
Wells  can  be  sunk  at  slight  expense  almost  anywhere,  through  which  good 
water  for  cattle  can  be  obtained  at  a  depth  of  from  ten  to  thirty  feet. 

The  expense  of  pumping  enough  water  for  thousands  of  cattle  through  a 
single  well  is  insignificant.  Good  flows  from  artesian  wells  can  be  obtained 
at  depths  varying  from  three  hundred  to  six  hundred  feet.  There  are  twenty 
such  wells  now  flowing  in  Kern  county,  and  numbers  in  Tulare  and  Fresno 
counties. 

Well  water  is  much  purer  and  more  healthful  for  cattle.  Less  disease  is 
found-among  cattle  watered  from  wells,  and  well  water  is  used  everywhere 
in  preference  to  river  water. 

Indeed,  it  would  perhaps  be  an  advisable  sanitary  measure,  and  for  the 
good  of  consumers,  as  well  as  cattle-raisers,  if  it  were  made  compulsory  by 
law  to  water  cattle  with  well  instead  of  river  water.  The  warm,  unhealthy 
and  frequently  stagnant  water  of  rivers  and  streams  is  a  well-known  cause 
of  the  fevers  from  which  so  many  cattle  die  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley.  It 
is  not  the  lack  of  water,  but  its  quality,  which  sickens  and  kills  them  in 
Buch  ^lumbers.  These  facts  show  that  riparianism  means  disaster  and  de- 
population to  the  southern  half  of  the  State,  and  brings  no  substantial  benefit 
to  the  cattle-owner  or  riparianist.  Every  business  man  should  take  an 
especial  interest  in  this  great  question,  and  join  actively  in  giving  aid  and 
<5omfort  to  the  efforts  now  being  made  before  the  Legislature  to  strengthen 
the  rights  of  the  people  who  are  irrigating  their  lands.  The  necessity  for 
immediate  remedy  is  pressing. 


Nevada  Transcript. 

The    Irrigation    Q^aestion. 

The  Speaker  of  the  Assembly  did  a  good  thing  when  he  appointed  Walrath 
Chairman  of  the  Irrigation  Committee,  because  he  secured  an  able  and  intel- 
ligent man  for  the  peiformance  of  the  most  important  duty.  Any  one  who 
has  noticed  the  conflict  going  on  between  the  men  who  claim  to  have  the 
water  of  any  stream  passing  the  property  flow  on  to  the  ocean  unmolested 
and  undiverted,  and  those  who  claim  the  right  to  divert  the  streams  of  the 
State  upon  the  arid  plains,  will  appreciate  the  importance  of  the  Irrigation 
Committee,  which  is  to  report  a  policy,  if  possible,  consistent  with  private 
rights  and  the  interests  of  the  State. 

In  the  mountains,  at  an  early  day,  the  miners  rejected  the  doctrine  of 
*•  riparion  rights,"  as  unadapted  to  their  wants  and  circumstani^es,  and  the 
Courts  of  the  State  sustained  them,  the  common  law  of  England  to  the  con- 
trary notwithstanding.  The  diversion  of  water  was  a  necessity,  and  the 
necessity  prevailed  over  legal  refinements.  The  rapid  development  of  gold 
production  evinced  the  wisdom  of  disregarding  the  common  law,   which 


41 


would  have  confined  the  waters  of  the  mountains  to  the  canyons  instead  fo 
allowing  their  distribution  to  the  numerous  places  where  they  were  needed. 
Had  Judge  Murray  been  as  hidebound  in  the  olden  time  as  Judge  Sharp- 
stein  now  is,  the  gold  would  have  remained  in  the  foothills,  and  the  water 
run  waste  to  the  sea.  But  that  eminent  jurist  saw  that  the  rule  ceased  with 
the  cessation  of  the  reason  for  it;  that  new  conditions  required  new 
treatment,  and  he  gave  full  effect  to  the  policy  of  the  appropriation  and  di- 
version of  water. 

In  the  whole  south  of  the  State,  and  much  of  the  middle  portion,  a  sim- 
iliar  question  is  now  pending.  It  has  been  found  by  experiment  that  the 
arid  plains  can  be  made  fabulously  productive  by  water.  Large  communities 
have  grown  up,  supported  by  the  agricultural  products  of  a  region  hereto- 
fore sterile.  Thousands  of  people  find  profitable  employment  on  irrigated 
land.  Water  is  the  great  civilizer.  Its  magic  touch  causes  the  desert  to 
bloom  like  the  rose.  Withdraw  the  water  and  the  bloom  fades,  the  fertility 
changes  at  once  to  sterility,  the  ashes  of  desolation  cover  again  the  rescued 
domains.  A  more  deadly  stab  at  the  general  prosperity  of  the  State  could 
not  be  inflicted. 

Why  should  not  a  system  that  has  redeemed  so  much  of  the  State  from 
barrenness  be  continued  and  extended,  as  it  may  be  infinitely?  Judge 
Sharpstein  and  three  other  judges  answer:  "  Because  in  England  a  man  has 
a  right  to  have  the  waters  flowing  by  his  land  continue  to  flow  there  that  he 
may  water  his  cattle."  But  England  is  a  wet  country,  with  a  minimum  of 
thirty  inches  rainfall.  California  is  a  dry  country,  and  the  San  Joaquin  and 
Tulare  valleys  have  a  maximum  of  four  inches  rainfall,  and  other  parts  of 
the  State  have  varying  degrees  of  aridity.  To  the  mind  of  a  layman  it  is 
not  obvious  what  English  customs  have  to  do  with  the  matter.  But  it  would 
seem  that  the  body  of  the  common  law  was  not  intended  to  apply  where  its 
application  is  incongruous;  where  the  conditions  are  so  diflferent  that  the 
interests  involved  are  injured  rather  than  fostered.  So  Judge  Murray  held; 
and  so  it  has  been  held  in  Colorado,  upon  this  very  irrigation  question,  viz: 
that  the  policy  of  the  State  is  opposed  to  the  common  law  rule,  and  that  the 
riparian  proprietor  who  makes  no  beneficial  use  of  flowing  water  by  his  land 
has  no  right  to  complain  of  one  who  diverts  the  water  to  useful  purposes. 
We  need  the  doctrine  in  California. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

The  Irrigation   Business. 

It  will  take  more  statesmanship  tnan  has  yet  been  manifest  at  Sacramento 
to  accomplish  anything  for  agriculture  in  Southern  California.  The  bull 
should  be  taken  by  the  horns  and  men  forced  to  vote  for  or  against  some  one 
set  of  measures,  with  the  clear  understanding  that  their  votes  will  hereafter 
class  them  either  as  enemies  or  as  friends  of  irrigation.  It  is  impossible  to 
draw  hills  whidR  shall  please  everybody.    To  accomplish  results  for  the  gen- 


42 


eral  good,  individual  predilections  must  be  made  to  give  away.  Gentlemen 
must  remember  that  they  have  three  enemies  to  fight.  First,  the  riparian 
owners  object  to  interference  with  their  dog-in-the-manger  business.  Next, 
the  promoters  of  such  schemes  as  the  plan  for  securing  payment  of  the  drain- 
age claims  will  log-roll  to  make  the  passage  of  irrigation  measures  contingent 
upon  the  success  of  their  projects.  And  finally,  the  great  landowners  of  the 
south,  who  thoroughly  understand  that  if  things  are  allowed  to  drift  along 
as  they  are  doing  for  a  few  years  more  they  will  acquire  a  monopoly  oi  water 
in  the  southern  portions  of  the  State,  are  insidiously  throwing  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  legislation.  These  three  classes  of  enemies  are  not  to  be  de- 
spised. They  may  be  expected  to  appear  in  the  disguise  of  friends  of 
irrigation.  They  will  do  everything  that  can  be  done  to  kill  all  bills,  except 
to  put  themselves  squarely  on  record  against  irrigation. 

That  is  precisely  the  ground  upon  which  the  irrigators  should  force  them.. 
Few  members  will  dare  to  put  themselves  on  record  as  men  who  postponed 
for  two  years  the  development  of  Southern  California.  Compel  them  to  do 
80,  or  to  vote  with  the  true  men.  And  remember  that  there  only  remain 
twenty-three  working  days  for  the  Legislature  of  1885. 


San  Francisco  Alta. 

Pass  the  Bill. 

The  entire  press  has  for  months  voiced  the  demand  of  the  people  for  the 
enactment  of  irrigation  laws.  The  subject  has  been  universally  discussed  in 
all  its  phases.  The  necessity  and  wisdom  of  a  broad  public  policy  in  behalf 
of  irrigation  is  generally  conceded.  The  bills  prepared  with  a  view  to  an, 
equitable  settlement  of  the  question  have  been  widely  published  and  circu- 
lated. There  is  no  excuse  for  a  member  of  the  Legislature  being  ignorant  of 
their  contents.  Those  who  have  investigated  the  facts  and  the  law  compre- 
hensively and  thoroughly,  are  convinced  that  irrigation  cannot  survive  the 
adoption  of  English  riparian  law.  At  the  same  time  they  have  recognized 
as  a  factor  in  the  water  problem,  the  possibility  that  there  are  existing  vested 
riparian  rights  heretofore  acquired  by  virtue  of  the  common  law.  It  has  been 
found  that  this  common-law  right  confers  no  privilege  upon  the  riparian  owner 
to  use  water  for  the  irrigation  of  his  land  nor  to  sell  to  another  such  a  privi- 
lege. The  water  is  locked  within  the  river  banks  by  common  law.  The 
obvious  remedy  for  such  a  state  of  affairs  seems  to  be  a  legislative  declaration 
that  the  common  law  of  riparian  rights  shall  not  govern  this  State,  at  the 
same  time  providing  means  for  the  taking  of  water  for  irrigation,  and 
compensatiug  for  injury  resulting  to  any  person  by  reason  of  such  taking. 
One  of  the  bills  now  claiming  the  attention  of  the  Legislature  was  framed  to 
embody  these  ideas.  It  has  the  merit  of  brevity  and  directness.  Under  the 
operation  of  its  simple  provisions  irrigation  can  be  practiced  in  the  State.  If 
^t  becomes  a  law  the  riparian  owner,  to  whom  the  common  law  forbids  irri- 
gation, may  appropriate  water  and  irrigate  his  lands,  upon  properly  compen- 


43 


-sating  any  one  who  may  suffer  injury.  It  is  astounding  that  a  member  of 
the  Legislature,  representing  a  large  and  populous  county,  had  the  hardi- 
hood to  inform  his  constituency,  from  the  floor  of  the  Assemblj,  that  he  had 
not  read  the  bill.  If  any  other  member  has  not  had  the  time  to  real  this 
bill,  he  had  best  hasten  to  do  so,  for  he  will  there  fiad  expressed  the  wish  of 
the  people. 

San  Francisco  Post. 

The  Legislature  has  but  twenty-one  days  yet  to  serve,  and  it  is  not  likely  to 
accomplish  much  beyond  passing  the  appropriation  bills.  Perhaps,  taking  it 
all  in  all,  this  may  be  taken  as  a  matter  for  congratulation  rather  than  regret. 
There  are  many  vicious  bills  pending  before  it,  and  few  that  there  is  any 
pressing  necessity  for  passing.  The  irrigation  bill  is  the  most  important 
one  pending,  and  it  should  receive  the  first  attention  in  the  short  time  yet 
remaining. 

f 

Daily  Humboldt  Standard. 

Irrig^aiion. 

In  Humboldt  we  are  not  interested  in  the  subject  of  irrigation.  The  humid 
atmosphere  relieves  us  from  the  necessity  of  devising  artificial  means  of  pro- 
curing water  for  the  fields.  But  the  question  of  irrigation  is  agitating  a  large 
portion  of  the  people  of  the  State,  is  puzzling  the  Legislature,  and  has 
presented  its  intricate  problems  to  the  courts.  The  riparian  owners,  thai  is, 
those  who  own  the  land  through  which  the  water  flows,  are  unwilling  that 
the  flow  shall  be  diminished  by  any  person  appropriating  it  for  the  purposes 
of  irrigation  at  a  point  further  up  the  stream.  Such  men  have  bought  laud 
at  an  increased  price  on  account  of  its  contiguity  to  bodies  of  water,  and  a 
dimunition  of  the  water  depreciates  the  value  of  the  property.  On  the  other 
hand,  thers  are  thousands  of  acres  of  parched  and  barren  plains  which,  by 
irrigation,  might  be  made  to  bloom  and  give  homes  to  thousands  of  families. 
The  owners  of  these  unprofitable  wastes  are  asking  for  a  general  distribution 
of  the — what  has  been  called  God's  free  gift  to  man — water.  Out  of  the  con- 
flicting demands  of  these  two  classes,  the  Legislature  is  endeavoring  to  frame 
some  law  that  will  meet  the  equities  of  the  case.  Probably  nothing  can  be 
accomplished  at  this  session  of  the  Legislature,  but  the  question  is  of  para- 
mount importance,  and  will  continually  come  up  until  it  is  definitely  settled. 
In  the  end,  private  interests  of  the  riparian  owners  must  be  made  subservient 
to  the  general  good.  Better  that  a  large  portion  of  the  people  should  prosper 
than  that  a  few  should  be  allowed  to  selfishly  deprive  them  of  every  oppor- 
tunity. But,  in  the  stimulated  prosperity  which  would  result  from  irrigation, 
-even  the  riparian  owners  would  reap  an  advantage  in  the  increase  of  values. 


44 


San  Luis  Obispo  Tribune. 

Riparian  and  Irrififation. 

One  of  the  chief  questions  agitating  the  California  Legislature,  is  that  of  the- 
•Qse  of  the  water  of  the  mountain  streams  .  The  question  is  between  riparian 
owners  and  irrigators.  The  owners  of  land  bordering  the  rivers  object  to- 
the  diversion  of  the  water,  and  the  owners  of  land  on  the  dry  plains  object  to 
the  water  going  to  waste  in  evaporation,  or  sinking  in  the  beds  ol  streams,  or 
lost  in  the  ocean.  The  early  laws  and  customs  of  California  permitted  the 
diversion  of  streams,  the  water  being  designed  for  mining  purposes,  and 
taken  along  the  high  ridges  in  ditches,  flumes  and  canals.  The  water  can  be 
nsed  for  mining,  manufactures  and  irrigating.  These  privileges  have  become 
vested  rights,  and  recognized  as  such  by  the  Commissioner  of  the  General 
Land  Office,  and  by  the  Federal  and  State  Courts.  The  system  has  worked 
well  in  the  past,  appears  to  be  just,  and  we  think  should  be  continued,  as  the 
only  system  adapted  to  the  climate  and  typography  of  California.  The  com- 
mon law  of  England  confines  the  use  of  waters  of  streams  to  those  owning 
the  banks,  and  that  law  has  been  adopted  in  this  State  when  not  inconsistent 
with  the  laws  and  Constitution.  As  that  part  of  the  common  law  is  inconsis- 
tent with  the  best  interests  of  the  State,  and  as  customs  and  decisions  have 
changed  the  rule,  the  question  should  be  considered  settled.  To  forbid  the 
diversion  of  the  waters  in  the  canyons  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  on  the  claims  of 
the  riparian  owners,  would  bo  an  absurdity. 


The  Merced  Express. 

Irrig^ation. 

The  Legislature,  which  convenes  next  Monday  week,  will  no  doubt  be 
called  upon  to  give  considerable  attention  to  the  question  of  irrigation  and 
riparian  rights.  The  law  as  it  now  stands  is  very  complicated  and  perplexing, 
if  the  courts  decide  in  favor  of  the  riparianist — which  they  are  inclined  to  do. 
It  will  be  a  blow  to  irrigation,  and  kill  any  method  of  irrigation  that  is  {now 
successfully  in  use.  Under  the  existing  laws  the  riparianists  have  some 
rights  which  the  courts  feel  in  duty  bound  to  recognize,  but  these  laws  should 
be  so  modified  as  to  favor  irrigation;  for,  without  a  thorough  system  of  irriga- 
tion, our  valley  lands  are  to  a  certain  extent  worthless.  If  the  time  is  not  at 
hand  now,  it  will  come  soon  when  these  riparian  rights  must  be  surrendered 
to  irrigation,  as  it  will  be  for  the  public  good.  We  must  have  a  system  of 
irrigation,  and  the  sooner  these  riparian  rights  are  relinquished  the  better  it 
will  be  for  the  whole  State. 


San  Francisco  Post. 

Mark  Where  He  Stands. 

When  old  burdens  have  grown  past  endurance,  or  new  evils  have  threatened 
the  welfare  of  the  people,  the  Kepublican  party  has  never  failed  to  be  fore- 
most in  finding  and  applying  the  remedy^ 


45 


The  body  politic  is  now  sorely  afflicted  with  a  disease  called  "riparianism.'*' 
The  germ  of  the  disease  was  brought  into  the  State  with  the  common  law  of 
England.  It  was  supposed  until  lately  that  after  treatment  for  a  generation 
by  our  doctors  of  the  law,  the  affliction  had  been  eradicated  from  our  political 
system,  never  to  re-appear.  But  the  present  Supreme  Court  has  brought  it 
to  the  surface,  and  now  the  malady  has  taken  such  form  that  nothing  short 
of  radical  treatment  will  be  efficacious. 

The  diagnosis  of  the  case  in  a  nutshell  is  this:  When  we  organized  as  on© 
of  the  federal  union,  we  adopted  the  common  law  as  the  general  system 
which  should  be  the  rule  of  decision  in  our  courts.  The  people  began  the 
development  of  the  two  great  industries  of  the  State,  mining  and  farming. 
They  early  found  that  mines  and  farms  in  many  portions  of  the  State  must 
be  located  more  or  less  remote  from  the  streams.  Water  was  a  necessity  for 
both,  and  not  being  able  to  move  either  farm  or  mine  to  the  stream,  the  water 
was  taken  out  in  ditches  and  canals  to  wash  the  gold-bearing  earth  and  irri- 
gate the  fertile  soil.  It  never  occurred  to  the  hardy  miner  or  the  toiling 
farmer  to  send  over  to  England  for  a  copy  of  1  Sim.  and  Stuart,  where  he 
would  have  found  in  the  case  of  Wright  vs.  Howard,  the  language  of  Sir  John 
Leach:  **Aqua  currit  et  debit  currere  ut  currere  solebat,"  the  riparian  law  of 
England.  As  time  passed,  farms  and  farmers  multiplied.  The  farmers  trod 
the  path  of  those  before  them,  and  diverted  the  waters  of  streams  for  irri- 
gation wherever  necessary.  No  one  needs  to  be  told  to  what  magnitude  the 
irrigation  interests  have  grown.  It  is  enough  to  say  that  nearly  every  man, 
woman  and  child  in  the  State  is  more  or  less  interested  in  irrigation  directly 
or  indirectly.  However,  after  irrigating  for  thirty-five  years,  the  farmers 
awoke  one  day  to  the  fact  that  the  Supreme  Court,  which  they  had  helped  to 
choose,  bad  procured  a  copy  of  1  Sim.  and  Stuart,  and  translated  the  Latin 
of  the  common  law,  and  that  the  plain  English  of  it  is  that  irrigation  is 
against  the  law,  and  the  irrigator  is  a  wrongdoer.  • 

Then  the  farmers  went  to  the  Legislature  and  prayed  that  it  be  made  law- 
ful for  them  to  irrigate,  as  they  have  been  irrigating  ever  since  the  State  was 
born.  They  found  in  that  Legislature  an  Assembly  overwhelmingly  Repub- 
lican, and  a  Senate  equally  divided  between  the  two  parties,  but  controlled 
politically  by  the  casting  vote  of  a  Democratic  Lieutenant-Governor.  A  bill 
known  in  the  Assembly  as  BiU  No.  410,  and  in  the  Senate  as  Bill  No.  210, 
was  introduced  in  both  houses,  intended  to  legalize  irrigation,  and  to  provide 
that  water  ought  to  flow  where  it  will  do  the  most  good.  The  Republican 
Assembly,  having  the  good  of  the  people  at  heart,  has  passed  the  bill  with 
only  a  corporal's  guard  against  it.  The  Senate  is  still  talking  over  it.  The 
farmers  think  that  one  vote  is  better  than  fifty  speeches.  If  the  bill  fails  in 
the  Senate,  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  defeat  will  not  be  due  to  the  vote  or 
filibustering  of  any  Republican.  The  party  will  suffer  greatly  by  it.  No 
Republican  Senator  can  contribute  to  its  defeat  without  injury  to  himself 
and  the  party.  We  give  below  a  list  of  the  friends  and  foes  of  the  people  in. 
the  Assembly: 


46 


For  in-igation — Ash,  Banbury,  Barnes,  Barnett.  Bublert,  Carter  of  Contra 
CJo-ita,  Clark,  Cook,  Corcoran,  Daley,  Deveney,  DeWitt,  Dooling,  Franklin, 
French,  Goucher,  Gregory,  Hazard,  Henley,  Hunt,  Hussey,  Johnson,  Kal- 
ben,  Laflferty,  Long,  Loud,  Lovell,  May,  McDonald,  McGlashan,  McMurray, 
Mears,  Moffat,  Munday,  Patterson,  Pellet,  Pyle,  Keeves,  Roseberry,  Euss, 
Sullivan,  Swayne,  Torrey,  Van  Voorhies,  Watson  of  El  Dorado,  Ward  of  San 
Francisco,  Weaver,  Woodward,  Yule  and  Parks — 50. 

Against  irrigation — Allen,  Colby,  Coleman,  Davis,  Ellison,  Firebaugh, 
Jordaa,  Heath,  Henry,  Heywood,  Hollister,  Jones,  McJunkin,  Walrath, 
Watson  of  Alameda,  Ward  of  Butte  and  Wood— 17. 

A  similar  list  will  be  given  of  the  Senate  when  the  roll-call  is  taken,  in 
order  that  the  people  may  know  ^Vhom  to  reward  as  their  faithful  servants, 
«nd  whom  to  consign  to  political  graves. 


S.  F.  Bulletin. 

An  Appeal  to  tlie  Baginess  Men  and  Properfy-Ovrners  of  San  Francisco. 
Another  Disaster  to  Our  Business  Interests.  Irrigation  in  California 
Virtually  Prohibited  by  Law.  What  Should  be  Done— Immediate 
Action  Necessary. 

Editor  Bulletin:  The  business  community  of  San  Francisco  (as  is  well 
known)  has  within  a  few  months  experienced  a  loss  of  trade  consequent 
upon  the  opening  of  the  Northern  and  Southern  Pacific  Kailways.  Thrown 
back  upon  our  immediate  neighborhood  for  a  market  for  our  goods,  we  have 
indulged  the  hope  that  having  in  the  State  of  California  a  large  extent  of 
territory  of  varied  resources  and  wonderful  fertility,  we  might,  by  attracting 
immigration  to  our  shores,  create  a  trade  very  much  greater  than  that  we 
have  lost.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  peculiar  climatic  conditions  of  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  State,  know  that  such  a  result  is  impossible  of  at- 
tainment without  a  sound  system  of  irrigation.  The  subject  of  irrigation  in 
California  is  one  of  the  most  important  that  can  engage  the  attention  of  the 
business  men  and  property-owners  of  this  city.  The  practice  of  irrigation 
on  a  large  scale  means  small  farms  producing  high-priced  commodities,  a 
prosperous  and  dense  population  where  now  only  the  wheat-grower  and 
stock- raiser  are  to  be  found,  and  a  market  for  our  merchants  at  our  very 
doors,  that  may  be  developed  into  enormous  proportions,  and  that  never  can 
be  taken  from  us. 

The  great  value  of  irrigation  as  a  m'eans  of  producing  wealth  is  but  little 
understood  by  most  people,  but  is  soon  recognized  by  all  who  give  any 
thought  to  the  subject.  The  history  of  irrigation  is  as  old  as  the  history  of 
the  world,  and  forms  an  important  part  of  it,  in  ancient  as  well  as  in  modern 
times,  in  all  countries  where  the  climate  is  similar  to  that  of  California. 
The  richest  portions  of  Italy  and  Spain  to-day  are  those  supplied,  through 
the  wisdom  and  financial  aid  of  their  Governments,  with  a  thorough  system 
of  irrigation.    Those  districts  support  a  dense  population,  and  the  enor- 


47 


mous  valuation  given  to  them  by  irrigation  is  shown  in  the  prices  at  which 
agricultural  lands  are  sold  at  there— ranging  from  $500  to  $3,000  per  acre. 
The  value  of  the  annual  overflow  of  the  Nile  in  Egypt  (which  is  the  crudest 
form  of  irrigation)  is  well  known,  and  in  China  and  India  more  than  half 
the  population  of  those  countries  would  die  of  starvation  if  deprived  of 
their  facilities  for  irrigation.  In  the  latter  country  the  English  Government 
has  expended  in  the  last  thirty  years  millions  of  pounds  sterling  in  the  con- 
struction of  irrigating  canals  and  reservoirs.  An  element  of  wealth  which 
has  been  recognized  in  all  ages  and  by  all  progressive  peoples  as  of  such 
paramount  value,  surely  ought  not  to  be  overlooked  by  us  in  these  days. 
In  our  own  State  we  have  an  abundant  evidence  of  the  enriching  effects 
of  the  use  of  the  water  in  irrigation.  In  Los  Angeles  and  San  Barnadino 
counties  many  instances  may  be  found  where  lands  that  ten  years  ago  were 
used  as  sheep'  ranges,  and  were  worth  but  $5  per  acre,  have  since  then  been 
supplied  with  water  for  irrigation  and  planted  with  fruit  trees  and  grape- 
vines, and  have  been  sold  at  $500  to  $1,000  per  acre.  Even  the  lands  left 
unimproved,  except  by  facilities  for  irrigation,  sell  readily  in  some  districts 
at  from  $200  to  $500  per  acre.  The  reason  why  these  properties  bring  such 
prices  is  because  they  produce  crops  which  pay  a  good  interest  on  several 
thousand  dollars  an  acre.  Without  irrigation,  there  can  be  no  doubt  what- 
ever that  owing  to  periodical  dry  years,  these  same  properties  would  return 
to  their  former  valuation. 

RAPID  SETTLEMENT   OF   SOUTHERN    CALIFORNIA. 

As  a  result  of  this  wise  use  of  the  waters  of  our  streams  that  portion  of  our 
State  is  settling  up  very  rapidly.  The  population  of  Los  Angeles  county  has 
increased  from  31,000  in  1880  to  over  55,000  in  1884,  and  in  the  city  of  Los 
Angeles  the  increase  has  been  from  11,000  in  1880  to  30,000  in  1884.  In 
Fresno  county  many  thousands  of  acres  of  what  were  once  considered  desert 
lands,  have  been,  in  the  last  four  years,  converted  into  colony  tracts  contain- 
ing thousands  of  happy  and  contented  families,  each  prospering  in  the  culti- 
vation of  twenty  acres  of  irrigated  land.  It  is  known  that  the  Sacram-nto 
Valley  has  nearly  (and  that  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  has  quite)  reached  its 
ultimate  capacity  as  a  farming  district,  dependent  upon  rain,  in  its  present 
area  of  wheat  farms.  Let  those  large  wheat  ranches  in  those  great  valleys  be 
supplied  with  water  for  irrigation  from  the  millions  of  cubic  feet  of  water 
daily  running  to  waste  in  the  Sacremento  and  San  Joaquin  rivers  and  they 
would  soon  be  cut  up  into  small  farms  supporting  millions  of  population 
where  now  there  are  only  thousands. 

Irrigation  in  California  already  represents  a  valuation  of  over  fifty  million 
dollars,  and  yet  only  a  commencement  has  been  made.  In  this  connection, 
the  following  extract  from  the  Colusa  Sun,  written  by  the  editor,  W.  S  Green 
after  a  visit  to  the  Fresno  colonies,  and  speaking  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley, 
will  give  an  idea  of  the  future  field  opening  up  to  our  merchants  through  the 
agency  of  irrigation.  He  says:  "Going  over  the  country,  one  can  see  that 
4 


48 


but  a  small  beginning  has  been  made.  The  possibilities  of  the  future  almost 
stagger  the  comprehension.  When  one  looks  at  this  vast  valley,  embracing 
more  than  one  hundred  thousand  square  miles,  all  capable  of  the  same  de- 
gree of  productiveness,  and  contemplates  it  all  so  in  cultivation,  the  feeling 
is  akin  to  the  contemplation  of  the  vastuess  of  space  or  an  endless  eternity. 
One  hundred  thousand  square  miles  gives  1,600,000  forty-acre  farms,  and 
forty  acres  is  larger  than  the  average  family  will  want  !  Each  forty  acres, 
cultivated  as  the  land  is  now  cultivated  here,  will  give  employment  to  five 
laborers,  besides  a  family  of  say  five.  This  gives  a  rural  population  of 
16,000,000  !    Then  what  will  the  towns  and  cities  be?" 

The  question  is  now  asked,  shall  this  development  be  encouraged  and 
assisted,  or  shall  it  be  stopped?  There  can  be  but  one  answer  to  that  ques- 
tion by  the  people  of  San  Francisco,  who  have  so  great  and  direct  an  interest 
in  this  matter.  The  issue  is  made  and  the  order  has  gone  forth  that  it  shall 
stop.  The  Supreme  Court  of  this  State  has  recently  rendered  a  decision 
which  affirms  and  sets  up  the  English  doctrine  of  "riparian  rights,"  and  pro- 
claims that  doctrine  to  be  the  law  in  this  State.  Under  that  law  all  the 
wealth  in  water  flowing  from  nature's  great  reservoirs,  the  snows  of  the  Sierra 
Nevada,  must  be  permitted  to  flow  "undiminished  in  quantity  and  unim- 
paired in  quality  "  to  the  sea.  Nor  has  even  the  riparian  claimant  a  right  to 
take  any  part  of  that  water  from  the  stream  for  purposes  of  irrigation  if  a 
man  owning  a  single  acre  on  the  stream  below  him  objects.  It  is  evident 
that  such  a  law,  if  enforced,  would  prove  disastrous  to  the  best  interests  of 
this  State.  Take  away  the  facilities  for  irrigation  now  existing  (and  that  is 
what  this  decision  has  done),  and  such  action  when  completed  would  utterly 
destroy  many  prosperous  communities  representing  millions  of  property  in 
Southern  California;  would  wholly  put  a  stop  to  further  development,  and 
would  remand  what  is  now  fast  becoming  the  richest  and  most  prosperous 
portion  of  our  State  to  the  condition  it  was  in  twenty  years  ago — the  grazing 
ground  for  cattle  and  sheep  that  die  of  starvation  in  dry  years. 

The  law  as  interpreted  by  the  Supreme  Court  must  be  obeyed.  Thousands 
of  our  industrious  farmers,  who  by  the  use  of  water  are  producing  wealth  for 
themselves  and  us,  must  shut  off  that  water  and  let  it  run  to  waste,  even  if 
such  action  causes  their  ruin  and  drives  them  penniless  from  the  State.  Is 
there  no  remedy?  Yes.  These  farmers  are  before  the  present  Legislature 
asking  that  a  law  be  passed  without  delay  to  enable  them  to  use  the  State's 
right  of  eminent  domain  and  condemn  water  rights  and  pay  for  them.  This 
the  riparian  claimants  oppose.  In  this  emergency  it  is  our  impei-ative  duty 
to  come  promptly  to  the  assistance  of  the  farmers  and  with  our  utmost  power 
help  them  to  have  this  and  any  other  just  and  equitable  laws  passed  which 
may  be  found  necessary  to  save  them  from  ruin. 

The  necessity  for  the  passage  of  laws  to  promote  and  encourage  irrigation 
in  this  State  has  been  urged  upon  succeeding  Legislatures  for  the  past  six 
years,  but  without  avail.  Our  powerful  "cattle  lords,"  who  have  always 
been  opposed  to  the  development  of  this  State  by  farming,  have  always  ap- 


49 


peared  at  Sacramento  in  force  on  such  occasions,  and  with  "convincing" 
Arguments  have  made  it  appear  to  the  majority  of  the  wisdom  of  those  Leg- 
islatures that  the  golden  flood  of  water  from  our  mountains,  that  might  be 
made  to  add  thousands  of  millions  to  the  wealth  of  California,  should  flow 
in  its  natural  channels  so  that  their  long-horned  cattle  might  be  provided 
with  water  to  drink.  It  has  been  suggestedi  to  them  that  a  well  and  a  pump 
<;ould  be  made  equally  as  effective  in  supplying  their  cattle  with  water,  but 
their  only  reply  is:  "The  law  gives  us  the  water  in  the  streams."  It  is 
time  the  people  awoke  to  a  realization  of  this  condition  of  things,  and  that 
they  see  to  it  that  no  more  "  convincing"  arguments  shall  be  allowed  to  per- 
petuate this  gross  outrage  upon  the  individual  interests  of  every  citizen  of 
the  State  except  our  "cattle  lords." 

It  has  been  said  in  opposition  to  irrigation  laws  that  there  are  many  con- 
flicting interests,  and  that  the  members  of  the  Legislature  did  not  and  could 
not  in  the  short  time  they  had  to  consider  the  matter,  understand  the  ques- 
tion, and  that,  therefore,  a  committee  should  be  appointed  to  investigate  the 
subject  and  report  to  the  next  Legislature.  The  same  tactics  are  being 
followed  out  now  and  the  correspondents  of  our  newspapers  say  that  there 
is  eveiy  probability  that  again  legislation  will  be  defeated. 

These  reasons  for  delay  are  now  utterly  without  force.  State  Engineer  W. 
Hammond  Hall,  and  a  corps  of  assistants,  have  for  nearly  six  years,  at  great 
expense  to  the  State,  been  thoroughly  investigating  this  matter.  Mr.  Hall 
has  mastered  thiaf  subject  and  has  given  us  such  minute  and  valuable  infor- 
mation concerning  irrigation  in  all  its  branches,  that  his  report  is  sure  to 
become  the  text-book  of  irrigation  for  the  world.  In  addition  to  that,  a 
convention  of  all  interested  in  irrigation  was  held  recently  in  Fresno.  By 
this  convention  a  committee  of  eighteen,  composed  of  prominent  citizens, 
having  a  practical  knowledge  of  the  subject,  was  appointed,  who,  with  the 
valuable  aid  of  Engineer  Hall,  have  prepared  a  number  of  bills  covering  the 
subject  of  irrigation  in  California.  These  bills  are  now  before  the  Legisla- 
ture; the  committee  of  eighteen  from  the  Fresno  Convention  are  now  in 
Sacramento  urging  the  passage  of  these  bills,  but  there  is  too  much  reason 
to  fear  that  the  delegation  in  the  Legislature  from  San  Francisco  understands 
the  vital  importance  of  these  measures  so  little,  or  they  are  so  indifferent  to 
it,  that  through  their  votes,  or  neglect  to  vote,  the  passage  of  these  bills  will 
again  be  defeated  and  incalculable  harm  result  before  any  remedy  can  be 
applied  two  years  hence. 

The  unquestionable  duty  of  every  business  man,  and  the  owner  of  a  foot 
of  real  estate  in  this  city,  at  this  time,  is  to  make  a  personal  matter  of  this 
subject  and  use  all  his  influence,  singly  and  jointly  with  others,  to  see  that 
all  our  representatives  in  the  Senate  and  Assembly  vote  in  favor  of  the  pas- 
sage of  bills  which  will  foster  irrigation  in  California,  and  that  these  hills  he 
•passed  at  this  session  of  the  Legislature.  M.  T.  K. 

San  Francisco,  Feb.  4,  1885. 


50 


Pacific  Rural  Press. 

Irriffation  Liaws. 

The  Senate  and  Assembly  are  now  devoting  stated  portions  of  their  time^ 
each  day  to  irrigation  subjects,  but  it  is  impossible  to  foresee  the  result. 
There  is  the  most  determined  and  organized  opposition  to  the  system  em- 
bodied in  the  Fresno  bills,  and  if  they  cannot  be  killed  outright,  as  the  oppo- 
sition intends,  there  will  be  a  strong  effort  to  win  some  of  those  now  holding 
with  the  irrigators  by  a  compromise  measure  to  appoint  a  commission  to  sit 
during  the  next  two  years,  and  report  to  the  next  Legislature;  this  move  be- 
ing advanced  upon  the  plea  that  the  present  Legislature  cannot  inform  itself 
fully  enough  during  the  few  days  remaining  to  demonstrate  the  truth  in  the 
opposing  claims  which  are  set  up.  It  would  be  rather  an  expensive  compro- 
mise, it  is  true,  and  we  do  not  see  that  such  a  commission  would  enlighten 
the  next  Legislature,  or  that  that  coming  body  would  be  content  to  draw  wis- 
dom from  such  a  source.  It  is  a  fact  that  the  irrigation  problem  has  been 
before  the  people  for  many  years,  and  has  been  discussed  in  the  public  prints 
by  public  meetings,  and  in  private  conversation  during  all  that  time,  and  yet 
many  men  aspiring  to  the  intelligence  of  legislators  claim  that  they  do  not 
know  anything  about  it.  How  will  the  next  Legislature  know  more?  How 
can  we  be  sure  that  the  next  Legislature  will  not  contain  men  who  will  not  be 
ready  to  accept  the  testimony  of  the  proposed  commission,  or  men  perhaps 
who  will  not  know  that  such  a  body  has  an  existence  untij  they  hear  of  it 
when  they  arrive  at  the  State  capital  and  irrigation  bills  are  placed  under 
their  noses. 

It  seems  to  us  that  this  Legislature  is  as  well  prepared  as  any  Legislature 
is  likely  to  be  to  take  some  action  on  this  subject  and  to  do  something  at 
least  to  advance  the  problem  some  degrees  towards  its  solution,  in  such  a 
way  that  the  development  of  the  State,  which  is  now  progressing  so  favora- 
bly, may  not  be  checked. 

San  Joaquin  Valley  Argus. 

Tlie  State  Irrigfation  Convention. 

By  far,  the  most  important  meeting  of  citizens  that  has  been  held  for 
years  past  in  the  San  Joaquin  valley,  took  place  in  Fresno,  the  first  week  in 
this  month,  resulting  in  a  declaration  of  principles  that  we  regard  as  sound 
in  a  business  point  of  view,  and  strictly  just  and  equitable  to  all  parties 
concerned,  and  equally  sound  and  just  as  legal  propositions.  The  perma- 
nent prosperity  and  rapid  development  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley  depends 
upon  the  utilizing  of  the  waters  flowing  down  the  watersheds  bounding  the 
valley,  and  finding  their  way  to  the  ocean  through  the  many  channels  that 
are,  in  their  natural  condition,  of  little  use  for  navigation,  and  as  means  of 
furnishing  water  supply  for  other  purposes,  answer  such  purposes  to  a 
limited  extent  only.  The  turning  of  the  streams  from  their  natural  chan- 
nels, by  means  of  canals  and  ditches,  and  conveying  the  water  over  the  high. 


51 


lands  so  as  to  make  it  available  for  irrrigating  the  soil  is  the  only  mode 
known  by  which  relief  can  be  economically  afforded.  The  people  who  have 
settled  upon  farms  on  the  great  plains  of  the  valley,  and  who,  when  prices 
for  the  principal  staple  ruled  higher  in  the  markets  of  the  world  than  at  the 
present  time,  were  barely  able  to  reap  a  living  profit  by  the  cultivation  of 
their  lands,  and  whose  condition  'at  the  present  time,  when  depression  in 
prices  render  their  condition  desperate,  makes  the  cultivation  of  a  variety  of 
crops  imperative,  if  we  hope  to  keep  up  with  the  progress  of  the  times, 
even  keep  from  retrogarding  in  wealth  and  prosperity  as  a  people. 

The  object  of  the  convention  was  to  adopt  measures  that  would  provide 
safety  for  investments  in  labor  and  capital  in  building  canals  and  ditches,  and 
bring  about  the  inauguration  of  a  system  of  constructing  irrigation  works 
that  would  be  just  to  all  interests  in  the  State,  and  at  the  same  time  enable 
the  people  on  the  arid  plains  to  have  the  use  of  the  water  at  reasonable  cost 
and  in  ways  that  will  produce  the  best  results  to  all  the  varied  interests  of 
the  people. 

With  the  legislation  asked  for,  and  united  action  by  the  people  of  the 
valley  and  foot-hill  regions  of  the  State,  men  of  capital  will  be  induced  to 
make  investments  with  fair  prospects  of  profit.  But  where  a  few  holders  of 
lands  along  the  lines  of  projected  canals,  who  have  bought  the  property 
with  a  view  to  gaining  the  greatest  possible  profit  by  reason  of  the  irriga- 
tion facilities  to  be  provided  enhancing  the  value  of  lands  affected,  to  unite 
and  form  stumbling  blocks  in  the  way  of  improvement,  by  making  extrava- 
gant demands  for  right  of  way  through  their  property,  instead  of  giving 
accordingly  as  their  lands  may  be  enhanced  in  value  by  reason  of  being 
made  available  for  irrigation.  Such  land-holders  are  purblind  and  often 
retard  many  needed  improvements  through  their  greed  of  gain,  and  yet 
accomplish  nothing  further  than  the  deferring  the  day  of  general  prosperity 
of  themselves  and  neighbors.  When  such  enterprises  as  the  building  of 
irrigation  canals  are  conceived,  the  people,  with  united  voice,  invite  the 
investment  of  capital;  but,  as  a  rule,  no  sooner  than  an  association  is  organ- 
ized under  the  incorporation  laws  of  the  State,  than  those  who  called  the 
loudest  and  most  persistently  for  the  help  of  capital  to  aid  them  to  obtain 
the  means  of  cultivating  their  lands  profitably,  raise  the  cry  of  "  Monopoly,'' 
and  seek  by  every  possible  device  to  check  progress  and  render  the  invest- 
ments they  had  prayed  for  unprofitable.  It  is  this  kind  of  policy  that  has 
time  and  again  retarded,  and  sometimes  defeated,  much  needed  improve- 
ments, to  the  great  injury  of  the  people  immediately  concerned. 


San  Francisco  Alta. 

Mot    a.    Party    Question. 

One  cause  of  gratification  to  the  people  in  the  pending  conflict  between 
irrigation  and  riparianism  in  the  Legislature  is  the  entire  absence  of  any 
■effort  to  make  any  issue  upon  the  subject  between  the  political  parties.    The 


52 


great  irrigation  interests,  inseparably  interwoven  with  the  powerful  commer- 
cial interests  of  the  city  and  State,  include  people  of  all  shades  of  political 
opinion.  They  comprise  the  entire  southern  half  of  California,  large  portions 
of  many  northern  counties,  a  great  part  of  the  commercial  community  of  the 
city,  together  with  the  great  body  of  the  people  who  supported,  in  the  new 
Constitution,  the  provision  making  the  lise  of  water  a  public  use.  No  indi- 
vidual can  afford  to  make  this  a  party  question,  nor  can  any  party.  But 
while  irrigation  is  not  a  party  question,  it  is  a  political  one.  And  it  is  polit- 
ical to  the  extent  that  it  is  destined  to  cut  a  leading  figure  at  coming  elec- 
tions. The  people  of  Southern  California  are  at  the  present  time  expecting 
cohfidently  that  the  majority  in  both  Houses  are  about  to  yield  to  their 
prayers.  The  votes  in  each  House  have  encouraged  this  confidence.  Ex- 
cluding the  vote  of  Senator  Cox,  who  admits  himself  to  be  directly  and 
pecuniarily  interested  against  irrigation,  or  counting  his  vote  on  the  riparian 
side,  the  Republicans,  if  united,  could  control  action  upon  the  subject  in 
either  House;  or  the  Democrats  can,  joined  with  a  few  riparianists  in  the 
Senate,  effectually  block  legislation.  These  great  interests  before  enumerated 
will  exercise  unmeasurable  influence  in  the  politics  of  the  future.  They  ara 
now  observing,  with  watchful  eyes,  the  course  of  parties  as  well  as  indi- 
viduals. Common  political  prudence  dictates  that  party  leaders  shall  not 
interfere  to  draw  party  lines  and  make  party  warfare  against  the  cause  of 
irrigation. 

Fresno  Republican. 

No  Excuse  for  Delay. 

The  riparianists  have  already  exposed  their  plan  of  action  in  the  fight 
against  irrigation  legislation.  A  member  from  San  Francisco  fathers  a  bill 
providing  for  a  commission  to  investigate  the  subject  of  irrigation  for  two 
years  more.  This  is  simply  a  transparent  scheme  for  delay.  The  riparian- 
ists dare  not  meet  the  issue  squarely  upon  its  merits,  hence  the  resort  to  the 
tactics  of  delay.  In  the  early  days  of  the  agitation  of  this  question  there 
were  some  grounds  for  deferring  action  on  this  question  for  the  ,  purpose  of 
investigation,  but  at  this  time  there  is  no  longer  any  excuse  for  delay. 

The  question  of  irrigation  has  been  undergoing  careful  investigation  by 
men  competent  for  the  important  duty  for  several  years,  and  especially  for 
the  two  years  last  past.  State  Engineer  Hall  has  been  at  work  assiduously 
upon  it,  and  has  made  a  most  thorough  investigation.  His  report  not  only 
comprises  a  statement  of  the  condition  of  the  irrigation  districts  of  the  State^ 
an  accurate  estimate  of  the  natural  water  supply,  the  adaptability  of  different 
portions  of  the  State  to  irrigation,  but  also  an  exhaustive  history  of  irrigation 
in  E:^ypt,  Italy,  Spain  and  Mexico.  It  embraces  most  of  the  essential  infor- 
mation necessary  for  intelligent  action  in  the  matter.  Whatever  knowledge 
may  be  lacking  from  other  reliable  sources  is  furnished  in  the  proceedings  of 
the  State  Irrigation  Convention  recently  assemb  led  in  Fresno.    If  there  were 


63 


no  other  information  avail  ble,  the  action  ot  that  important  and  representa- 
tive body  furnishes  enough  to  show  conclusively  that  farther  delay  is  the  last 
thing  that  should  be  thought  of.  The  vast  interests  now  depending  upon  ir- 
rigation in  California  are  confronted  with  a  decision  from  the  Supreme  Court 
which  ilenies  their  right  to  exist,  and  as  the  present  law  is  so  construed,  the 
supreme  necessity  of  an  immediate  change  of  that  law  must  be  evident  to  any 
sane  and  unprejudiced  mind. 

The  litigation  of  this  question  of  the  right  to  use  the  water  of  natural  streams 
for  irrigation  has  already  too  long  blocked  the  wheels  of  progress  and  pros- 
perity in  this  State,  and  the  people  are  looking  to  their  representatives  in 
this  Legislature  for  relief  that  can  only  come  from  intelligent  legislative  ac- 
tion. The  people  have  long  and  but  too  patiently  struggled  against  the  evils 
inflicted  by  the  rulings  of  courts  which  recognize  the  supremacy  of  the  old 
English  common  law,  and  now  in  behalf  of  'the  thousands  of  homes  they 
have  builded  upon  the  desert  made  to  blossom  as  the  rose,  of  the  millions 
of  capital  invested,  and  in  behalf  pf  the  best  material  interests  of  the  State, 
they  ask  the  Legislature  now  assembled  to  take  this  burden  from  them  and 
give  them  protection  instead  of  destruction  under  the  law.  A  postponement 
of  the  settlement  of  this  question  for  two  years  longer  is  suicidal  to  the  best 
interests  of  California.  Should  such  a  course  be  pursued  it  can  only  be 
attributed  to  the  gross  ignorance  or  venality  of  the  Legislature.  This  ques- 
tion is  the  paramount  one  before  the  Legislature.  That  body  must  settle 
it  in  the  interests  of  the  people  or  suffer  the  disgrace  of  an  ignominious  and 
inexcusable  failure  t®  perform  a  plain  duty.  We  believe  the  Legislature  will 
perform  its  duty. 

Record-Union. 

A  Shamefal  Story. 

Editors  Recobd- Union:  Under  the  above  caption,  the  Bee  of  yesterday  has 
the  following: 

"It  is  said  that  a  corrupt  combination  has  been  made  by  the  hydraulio 
miners  and  the  supporters  of  the  Fresno  irrigation  bills,  by  which  each  party 
to  the  bargain  agrees  to  help  the  other's  bill  or  bills  through  the  Legislature* 
The  hydraulic  miners  want  the  Cross  dam  bill  passed,  and  the  water  appro- 
priators  are  willing  to  co-operate  if  the  hydraulicers  will  help  the  Fresno 
bills.  This  is  a  report  which  we  hear  on  good  authority.  We  trust,  however, 
that  it  is  not  true.  It  \^ould  be  an  infamous  bargain — a  burning  shame  and 
disgrace  to  those  agricultural  communities  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State, 
whose  representatives  should  strike  hands  with  the  hydraulicers  over  the 
wicked  bill  introduced  by  Senator  Cross.  We  warn  the  representatives  of  the 
irrigation  interests  that  any  such  bargain  must  result  in  disaster.  It  is  incon- 
ceivable that  legislators  elected  from  agricultural  communities  could  support 
the  Cross  bill  as  the  result  of  a  bargain  and  sale." 

Yes,  this  is  a  shameful  story — so  shameful  that  it  is  a  shame  that  any  news- 
paper could  be  found  shameless  enough  to  print  it.    I  would  ask  for  the  Bee^s 


54 


"good  authority;"  but  as  craven  cowardice  and  mendacious  falsehood  always 
walk  hand  in  hand,  no  man  will  step  forward  and  say:  "I  originated  the 
lie." 

Now,  Messrs.  Editors,  I  feel  somewhat  deeply  on  this  subject,  because  I 
was  all  through  the  anti-slickens  fight,  and  have  been  in  the  innermost  coun- 
cils of  the  irrigators  since  the  Ist  of  December  last.  No  man  in  this  State 
spent  more  time  and  money  in  behalf  of  the  valley  interests,  in  proportion  to 
mtans,  than  I;  and  being  now  in  the  full  and  complete  confidence  of  theirri" 
gators,  such  a  story  as  the  above  amounts  to  a  charge  against  me  of  treason 
and  bad  faith  to  the  cause  of  the  valley  interests  in  opposition  to  hydraulic 
mining. 

The  Bee  says  that  this  would  be  an  infamous  bargain;  that  it  would  be  a 
burning  shame  and  disgrace  for  the  representatives  of  agricultural  communi- 
ties to  shake  hands  with  the  hydraulicers.  And  so  it  would  be,  but  why? 
Because  it  would  be  for  gain,  giving  over  the  lovely  portion  of  the  Sacramento 
Valley  to  destruction,  to  desolation.  It  would  not  otherwise  be  an  infamous 
bargain,  would  it? 

But  let  us  cast  our  eyes  in  another  direction.  These  representatives  thus 
denounced  and  defamed  represent  a  people  made  happy  and  prosperous  by 
means  of  the  diversion  of  water.  The  desert  has  been  turned  into  vast  orange 
groves,  vineyards,  orchards,  meadows  and  grain  fields;  cities  have  been  built 
up;  the  industry  thus  developed  and  the  wealth  thus  created  amounts  to  hun- 
dreds of  millions  of  dollars:  but  a  crisis  comes  when  legislation  must  be  had 
or  all  this  must  perish,  and  beggary  and  want  come  to  tens  of  thousands  of 
people,  and  California  set  back  in  the  march  of  time  a  score  or  more  of  years. 
When  the  representatives  of  these  people  come  asking  for  just  and  equitable 
legislation,  asking  for  the  preservation  of  their  homes  and  their  firesides,  we 
find  the  representatives  of  Sacramento  "filibustering"  on  the  floor  of  the 
legislative  halls  against  the  passage  of  any  measure  for  their  relief,  and  one 
of  the  principal  papers  of  the  city  denouncing  them  as  lunatics,  and  giving 
credence  and  circulation  to  infamous  falsehood.  What  "bargain*' brought 
about  such  actions  as  these? 

Even  to  save  their  homes  the  irrigators  have  made  no  bargains  with  the 
enemies  of  the  valley  interests;  they  would  prefer  to  defend  their  rights  with 
their  own  good  strong  arms,  as  the  people  of  Mussel  Slough  once  did,  to  such 
a  bargain. 

1  am  in  this  contest  to  stay,  and  am  willing  to  register  an  oath  to  oppose, 
as  long  as  I  can  wield  a  pen,  any  man  for  any  office,  who  through  corruption 
or  stupidity  opposes  all  legislation  for  the  relief  of  these  people.  Mere  party 
politics  tiuk  into  utter  insignificance  alongside  such  a  question  as  this. 
Men  try  to  get  out  of  responsibility  in  this  matter  by  saying  that  it  is  too 
complicated,  and  they  must  have  more  time.  The  question  is  very  simple, 
and  he  who  confesses  that  he  cannot  understand  it  ought  never  to  seek 
public  office.  It  is:  Shall  the  desert  be  a  desert,  or  shall  the  desert  be  an 
earthly  paradise?  Twist  it  and  turn  it  as  you  may,  and  that  is  all  there  is 
to  it. 


55 


The  Bee  says  it  is  inconceivable  how  legislators  elected  from  agricultural 
counties  could  support  the  Cross  bill  without  a  bargain.  It  should  have 
-waited  until  they  did  so  before  denouncing  them.  But  did  it  never  strike 
the  Bee  that  it  was  inconceivable  how  a  newspaper  asking  these  irrigators  to 
save  it  and  its  constituency  from  ruin,  could  seek  to  ruin  them,  and  how  leg- 
islators representing  a  constituency  begging  to  be  saved  from  ruin,  could  join 
in  a  filibustering  scheme  to  ruin  others. 

But  without  any  bargains  the  Assembly  has  done  nobly,  and  there  can  be 
no  doubt  but  that  the  Senate  will  do  likewise,  and  California  will  receive  such 
an  impetus  in  her  onward  march  that  the  Legislature  of  1885  will  ever  be  held 
in  grateful  remembrance.  W.  S.  Green. 

Sacramento  Capital. 

A  Dangferous  Amendment. 

An  effort  is  being  made  to  amend  ^nate  Bill  210,  declaring  against  riparian 
rights,  or  the  English  common  law,  our  Supreme  Court  has  shown  a  disposi- 
tion to  sustain,  confining  the  water  of  the  flowing  streams  to  the  natural 
channels  and  preventing  its  use  in  this  State  for  the  most  necessary  pur- 
poses, by  a  proviso  giving  to  riparian  proprietors  the  right  to  flow  past  their 
premises  of  sufficient  water  for  stock  and  domestic  purposes.  This  seems  so 
fair  and  reasonable  on  its  face  that  it  has  inclined  many  legislators,  unac- 
quainted through  personal  knowledge  and  experience  with  the  questions 
involved  in  this  momentous  subject  of  irrigation,  to  look  upon  it  with  favor. 
But  we  assert  that  this  apparently  fair  and  reasonable  provision,  in  its  practi- 
cal effect  would  nullify  all  irrigation  legislation,  effectually  check  the  pros- 
perity of  the  southern  part  of  the  State,  and  cause  it  to  retrograde  in  the 
path  of  progress  as  fast  as  it  has  hitherto  advanced.  To  make  this  clear,  we 
set  out  by  stating  a  fact  familiar  to  every  resident  of  that  section,  or  of  any 
other  arid  country,  that  the  largest  end  of  every  stream  is  upward,  and  the 
little  end  downwards;  or,  in  other  words,  while  the  streams  issue  from  the 
mountains  bold  and  strong,  they  grow  rapidly  smaller  as  they  advance  into 
dry  plains  until,  except  in  flood  times,  by  evaporation  and  absorption,  they 
sink  and  disappear  altogether.  A  few  miles  beyond  these  points  of  disap- 
pearance, where  the  floods  reach,  spread  over  extensive  tracts  and  make 
swamps,  are  the  lands  of  the  riparians — swamp  lands  so  called,  for  which 
they  have  obtained  title  from  the  State  by  the  construction  of  drainage  works 
or  levees  to  prevent  overflow — the  men  who  are  opposing  the  irrigation  bills 
now  before  the  Legislature.  They  hope,  through  the  absurd  law  referred  to, 
to  practically  own  all  the^e  streams  and  hold  all  the  vast  interests  above  them 
at  their  mercy.  This  they  now  see  they  cannot  hope  to  accomplish  on  the 
bare  monstrous  proposition  involved  in  the  common  law,  and  hence  this 
amendment  giving  them  more  than  they  could  have  if  never  a  drop  of  water 
had  been  diverted  above  them.  It  was  only  in  flood  time,  in  the  unchanged 
natural  conditions,  that  water  reached  them  at  all,  and  then  came  a  super- 
abundance,  forming  lakes  and  ponds  lasting  all  the  season,  while  iu  the 


56 


normal  stages  of  the  streams  they  disappeared  miles  before  they  reached  the- 
lands  that  in  flood  time  they  submerged. 

What  is  the  effect  then  of  this  amendment?  Is  it  not  to  give  these  alleged 
riparians  all  they  could  get  under  the  broadest  construction  of  the  common 
law?  To  give  them  water  for  stock  and  domestic  purposes  when  the  streams 
are  not  in  flood  and  water  is  most  needed  for  irrigation,  would  be  to  compel 
every  drop  to  remain  in  the  channels  to  sink  in  the  sands  long  before  it 
reached  their  lands,  giving  them  power  to  levy  tribute  upon  the  agricultural 
interests  above  them  in  millions  of  dollars  annually.  Besides  all  these  ripa- 
rians, cattle  men  have  long  since  found  that  the  stagnant  alkaline  water  fes- 
tering in  ponds,  sloughs  and  tule  swamps,  under  the  burning  sun  of  the  dry 
season,  is  injurious  to  their  stock,  and  have  substituted  with  infinite  pecuni- 
ary advantage,  the  cold,  pure  water  of  artesian  and  other  wells,  which  are 
found  in  abundance  near  the  surface.  The  irrigation  bills  provide  for  the 
payment  to  them  of  all  damage  that  may  result  from  the  diversion  of  water 
above  them,  which  must  in  time  again  ||ach  them  more  permanently  by  per- 
colation, as  we  have  elsewhere  shown;  but  with  this,  which  would  satisfy  all 
men  in  every  other  walk  of  life  actuated  by  the  ordinary  consideration  of 
interest  and  business,  they  are  not  satisfied.  All  this  being  so,  in  the  light 
of  the  plain,  truthful  relation  of  facts  given  above,  what  are  we  to  think?  It 
is  impossible  to  view  it  in  any  other  light  than  that  they  are  striving  (to 
put  it  in  the  mildest  form)  to  efl'ect  a  huge  speculation,  in  violation  of  jus- 
tice, right  and  public  policy.  More  plainly  speaking,  they  are  using  an  imag- 
inary advantage,  as  Shy  lock  did.  The  payment  of  their  bond  is  not  enough, 
a  dozen  men  at  most  insist  on  being  given  the  power  to  draw  the  life-blood 
from  the  fairest  agricultural  region  of  the  State.  They  scorn  the  money- 
value  of  their  claims.  They  want  the  blood  and  life  of  those  over  whom 
they  imagine  the  law  gives  them  an  advantage.  Hopeless  of  having  this 
openly  confirmed,  they  have  resorted  to  insidious  methods,  trusting  that  they 
may  thus  grasp  the  prize  they  cannot  gain  openly.  It  should  be  borne  in 
mind  that  in  taking  away  and  paying  these  men  for  their  alleged  riparian 
rights,  the  same  rights  still  remain  to  them  that  are  common  to  all.  They 
may  become  appropriators  of  water  connecting  with  the  irrigating  systems 
above  them  so  as  to  convey  water  with  as  little  waste  as  possible,  and  in  the 
seasons  of  overflow  they  will  still  have,  the  only  time  they  have  ever  had  it^ 
more  water  than  they  want. 

Fresno  Expositor. 

Irriijfatlon  lAttwa  Must  be  Passed. 

Every  member  of  the  California  Legislature  should  feel  it  a  duty  incum- 
bent on  him  to  see  that  suitable  laws  are  passed  at  the  present  session  for 
the  protection  of  the  irrigation  interests  of  this  State.  The  southern  half 
of  this  great  State  is  almost  entirely  dependent  on  irrigation  for  the  success- 
of  its  agricultural  and  horticultural  interests.    The  average  annual  rainfall 


57 


is  not  sufficient  to  produce  crops  or  maintain  the  thrifty  growth  of  vegeta- 
tion, and  without  irrigation  the  land  would  remain  forever  uncultivated.  But 
since  water  has  been  turned  out  over  the  thirsty  plains,  orchards,  vineyards, 
fields  of  alfalfa,  and  waving  corn  have  sprung  up  as  if  by  magic,  and  the 
hot,  brown,  desolate  waste  transformed  into  shady  groves,  green,  cool  and 
comfortable  retreats,  the  cosy  and  comfortable  houses  of  the  intelligent  and 
industrious  tillers  of  the  soil.  Before  this  change,  in  seasons  when  the 
rainfall  was  sufficient  to  produce  crops  of  grass,  great  herds  of  long-horned 
cattle  roamed  over  the  country  at  will,  and  when  they  were  fat  enough  for 
meat,  they  were  gathered  up  by  a  few  Mexican  vaqueros,  and  driven  to 
market,  where  they  were  sold  by  their  o-v^^ners,  the  California  cattle  kings, 
and  the  money  stowed  away  in  their  coffers  at  San  Francisco,  or  invested  in 
the  purchase  of  swamp  land  along  the  rivers  and  streams,  that  they  might 
secure  summer  grazing  when  the  overflow  subsided.  The  whole  population 
of  the  southern  counties  was  then  but  a  few  thousand  people,  more  than 
half  of  whom  were  Mexicans.  The  diversion  of  the  waters  of  the  rivers  and 
streams,  however,  caused  the  plains  to  be  settled  up,  and  the  long-horned 
cattle  were  driven  from  their  free  ranges,  and  their  owners  were  compelled  to 
fence  their  swamp  lands  so  as  to  keep  their  stock  off  the  farmers'  fields.  Of 
course,  the  stock-raiser's  profit  was  materially  reduced  by  these  circumstances, 
and  avarice  has  caused  them  to  seek  some  plan  to  check  the  progress  of 
the  country,  and,  if  possible,  drive  the  farmers  from  their  fields  that  they 
might  again  hold  dominion  over  the  broad  acres  of  Southern  California. 

The  doctrine  of  riparianism  was  dropped  on,  and,  notwithstanding  that 
these  men  had  purchased  what  was  known  as  swamp  lands,  which  extended 
only  to  the  banks  of  the  streams,  and  had  subsequently  secured  the  return 
of  their  moneys  from  the  public  treasury  by  swearing  that  they  had  so  re- 
claimed these  lands  from  the  overflow  of  the  rivers  as  to  render  them  capable 
of  producing  crops,  they  went  into  the  courts  and  swore  that  the.  water  was 
appurtenant  to  the  land;  that  the  land  was  worthless  and  unproductive  without 
the  water,  and  asked  to  have  those  who  had  diverted  the  water  and  put  it  to 
a  useful  purpose  enjoined  from  reaping  the  fruits  of  their  labor  and  intelli- 
gence, and  that  the  water  be  permitted  to  flow  on  and  ever  past  their  swamp- 
land farms.  The  prayers  of  these  petitioners  were  granted  by  the  courts, 
and,  so  far  as  their  judgments  are  concerned,  the  farmers  of  California  are 
perpetually  stopped  from  the  use  of  water  from  the  rivers  and  streams  for 
irrigation.  This  great  injustice  the  California  Legislature  is  now  called  on  to 
rectify,  and  it  must  not  falter  in  its  duty.  If  it  does  not  come  to  the  rescue 
of  the  irrigators  now  they  will  rue  it.  Woe  to  the  members  who  oppose  this 
interest,  should  any  of  them  ever  aspire  to  office  and  come  to  this  part  of  th©^ 
State  seeking  votes.  A  mark  will  be  put  on  them,  and  their  political  doom., 
forever  sealed. 


58 


Resources  of  California. 

^eceagity    of  Irrigfation— A  Terse  Revie^v  of  the  Subject— The  Conflict 
Between  Riparianism  and  Irrigfation. 

Of  the  tide  of  immigration  which  has  poured  into  California  during  many 
years  past,  a  large  current  has  turned  into  the  southern  part  of  the  State,  at- 
tracted by  the  great  promise  of  wealth  that  section  bids  fair  to  yield. 

The  mildness  of  the  climate  during  the  winter  season,  united  to  the  varied 
Agricultural  possibilities  of  the  soil,  and  the  immense  area  of  land  purchasable 
■at  cheap,  almost  nominal  rates,  have  proved  the  powerful  lodestone  which 
has  drawn  population  and  capital  to  it. 

The  leading  inducement,  however,  to  this  current  lay  in  the  fact,  that 
while  the  dryness  of  the  climate  and  the  aridity  of  the  land  rendered  it 
impracticable  to  cultivate  with  success  when  depending  solely  upon  the 
scanty  rainfall  for  water,  yet  by  means  of  artificial  irrigation  products  which, 
in  more  northern  climes,  are  planted  beneath  the  snow,  flourish  there  side 
by  side  with  the  luxuriant  vegetation  requiring  the  burning  sun  of  the  trop- 
ics, and  perennial  crops  are  produced  without  danger  or  loss  from  dry  years. 
There  were  to  be  found  lands  which,  appearing  as  dreary  and  sterile  as  the 
Great  Desert  of  Sahara,  needed  but  water  to  transform  them  into  green 
waving  fields  of  wheat,  or  shady  orange  groves. 

Scarcely  a  single  stream  of  the  thousand  and  one  of  this  fertile  region 
but  whose  waters  directed  by  human  agency  are,  through  irrigation,  furnish- 
ing daily  means  of  subsistence  to  the  people  and  making  solid  additions  to 
the  permanent  wealth  of  the  State.  Large  portions  of  the  Southern  counties 
are  networked  with  irrigating  canals  and  ditches,  furnishing  water  to  farms 
of  from  fifty  to  thousands  of  acres. 

The  water  which  is  used  for  irrigating  purposes  is  diverted  from  streams 
under  the  supposed  authority  of  what  is  known  as  the  law  of  appropriation. 
Without  this  law  such  diversion  would  be  unlawful  and  impossible.  If  our 
laws  and  our  courts  had  not,  in  time  past,  indeed,  ever  since  the  conquest  of 
the  territory  from  Mexico,  authorized  the  appropriation  of  water  for  irriga- 
tion, nearly  a  million  acres  of  land  now  cultivated  would  still  be  virgin  soil, 
and  of  the  150,000  people  who  form  the  population  of  Southern  California^ 
the  greater  proportion  would  be  strangers  to  our  State. 

Three  months  ago,  while  the  people,  resting  in  the  fancied  security  of 
their  water  rights  acquired  by  appropriation,  were  harvesting  their  crops, 
gathering  the  fruits  of  the  year,  or  preparing  for  the  coming  season,  like 
a  thunderbolt  out  of  a  clear  sky,  came  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  blast- 
ing and  destroying  the  cherished  popular  belief  of  years  past.  This  decision 
of  the  court  is  to  the  effect  that  the  common  law  of  England  is  the  law  of 
California  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the  water  of  streams,  and  that,  as  against  a 
riparian  owner,  that  is  to  say,  the  owner  of  land  upon  the  river  bank,  an  ap- 
propriator  has  no  rights.  Afterwards  the  court  recalled  the  decision  and  or- 
dered a  rehearing  of  the  question.  It  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  foretell 
what  the  final  conclusion  will  be.     It  is  even  possible  that  the  court  may 


59 


not  feel  called  upon  to  determine  the  question  in  the  particular  case  pend- 
ing. The  decision  may  not  be  reached  for  many  months.  Whatever  be  the- 
result,  it  is  enough  that  the  irrigating  industry  of  the  State  is  paralyzed  for 
the  time.  Until  a  certainty  is  established  one  way  or  the  other,  irrigation  is 
at  a  standstill.  With  every  knock  at  the  door,  the  irrigator  will  quake,  lest 
he  be  confronted  with  a  sheriff,  injunction  in  hand,  issued  at  the  suit  of  the 
riparian  owner,  forbidding  him  from  diverting  water  for  his  withering  vines 
and  fruit  trees  or  burning  grain.  The  irrigators  recognize  the  practical  result 
which  will  follow  the  reassertion  of  the  decision.  They  know  that  it  will  ex- 
terminate the  irrigation  interests  of  the  State  beyond  revival,  except  by  legis- 
lation. 

Under  the  common  law  of  England  it  is  well  settled  that  an  action  will 
lie  for  every  disturbance  of  riparian  rights,  without  evidence  of  appropria- 
tion of  the  water  for  any  purpose  of  utility,  and  without  even  proof  of 
any  special  damage,  hut  simply  on  the  ground  that  a  legal  right  is  injured  by 
the  disturbance,  and  that  this  is  sufficient  damage  to  support  the  action;  appro- 
priation of  the  water  of  flowing  streams  for  purposes  of  utility  is  deemed  of 
no  importance  whatever  as  a  mode  of  gaining  a  right  or  of  acquiring  a  right  to 
sue  for  a  disturbance. 

It  is  equally  well  settled  by  the  same  law  that  a  riparian  owner  cannot, 
except  as  against  himself,  confer  on  one  who  is  not  a  riparian  owner,  any^right 
to  use  the  water  of  the  stream;  and  any  use  of  the  stream  by  a  non-riparian 
proprietor,  even  under  a  grant  from  the  riparian  proprietor,  is  wrongful, 
if  it  sensibly  affects  the  flow  of  water  by  the  lands  of  other  riparian,  pro- 
prietors. 

The  first  proposition  above  stated  forbids  irrigation  by  the  riparian 
owner;  the  second  closes  the  door  upon  the  non-riparian  owner  entirely,  and 
precludes  him  from  acquiring  any  right  whatever  to  the  waters  of  a  stream, 
even  for  ordinary  domestic  purposes,  much  less  for  irrigation.  It  matters 
not  how  near  his  land  may  be  to  the  river,  so  that  it  does  not  form  part  of 
the  bank;  it  is  of  no  consequence  what  his  necessities  are;  he  shall  not  so 
much  as  dip  a  bucket  of  water  from  the  stream,  without  the  deed  in  writing, 
signed,  sealed  and  delivered  to  him,  of  every  riparian  owner  below  to  the 
mouth  of  the  stream. 

Governed  by  this  law,  if  A,  who  owns  a  section  of  land  one  side  of  which 
borders  upon  a  stream,  sells  to  B  one-half  of  his  section  away  from  the 
stream,  B  does  not  become  a  riparian  owner.  He  cannot  use  the  water, 
nor  can  he  buy  the  right  from  A.  He  must  first  seek  and  satisfy  every  other 
owner  on  the  stream. 

The  very  large  majority  of  riparian  owners,  however,  are  appropriators- 
Never  relying  upon  or  caring  for,  perhaps  ignorant  of,  their  riparian  right, 
they  have  availed  themselves  of  the  usages  and  customs  of  the  State,  and 
the  decisions  and  laws  under  which  appropriations  are  sanctioned  and. 
authorized,  by  the  actual  diversion  and  use  of  water  for  irrigation. 


60 


15uoh  owners  will  be  enabled,  wheQ  they  so  desire,  to  subdivide  their 
lands,  and  sell  portions  not  adjacent  to  the  river,  together  with  an  interest 
in  their  water  right,  unless  the  common  law  of  riparian  rights  is  adopted. 

Suppose  for  the  moment  that  we  should  so  modify  the  common  law  as 
to  authorize  the  irrigation  of -riparian  lands.  The  rule  above  stated  would 
still  prevent  the  riparian  owner  from  granting  any  privilege  to  irrigate  any 
land  away  from  the  stream,  or  from  conveying,  with  a  water  right  attached, 
any  of  his  land  not  adjacent  to  the  stream. 

The  whole  system  operates  to  restrain  the  alienation  of  land  in  localities 
where  irrigation  is  a  necessity,  and  to  prohibit  the  irrigation  of  non-ripariau 
lands. 

From  every  standpoint  taken  in  the  discussion  of  the  relative  merits  of  the 
<5ontroversy  between  riparianism  and  appropriation,  the  conclusion  is  irre- 
sistible that  one  or  the  other  must  fall.  Life  to  riparianism  is  death  to  irri- 
.^ation.     The  union  of  the  two  is  legal  miscegenation. 

This  is  the  state  of  affairs  from  which  the  people  of  Southern  California 
are  crying  to  be  extricated.  That  interests  of  the  people  of  the  entire  State 
must  be  closely  allied  to  irrigation  cannot  be  doubted.  Irrigation  cannot 
proceed  without  the  right  of  appropriation.  Appropriations  cannot  be  made 
tinder  the  riparian  law  of  England. 

The  Legislature  is  called  upon  to  apply  the  remedy  without  delay.  The 
right  of  appropriation  should  be  so  fortified  by  law  as  to  make  it  operative 
even  against  ripafian  owners.  If  such  owners  have  vested  rights  of  property 
of  which  they  will  be  deprived  by  firmly  establishing  the  right  of  irrigation, 
let  them  be  properly  compensated,  but  do  not  yield  to  them  the  right  to  stand 
in  the  pathway  of  the  State  to  wealth  and  prosperity. 


S.  F.  Examiner. 

Irri£fation. 

The  people  of  Southern  California,  a  quarter  of  the  population  of  the  State, 
are  watching  the  fate  of  the  irrigation  bills  before  the  Legislature  with  intense 
anxiety.  The  entire  State  is  in  sympathy  with  the  efforts  of  the  irrigators  to 
obtain  legislative  relief.  When  the  recent  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
sustaining  the  ancient  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  was  made  public,  those 
dependent  upon  irrigation  were  appalled.  They  saw  instantly  the  frightful 
consequences  certain  to  follow  the  practical  enforcement  of  the  principle  of  the 
decision.  It  was  apparent  that  irrigation  must  cease.  The  laws  of  the  State, 
adopted  solely  for  the  purpose  of  furthering  the  progress  of  its  people,  have 
been  found  by  the  Courts  to  contain  an  element  fatal  to  the  advancement  of 
half  the  State.  The  irrigators  assembled  in  convention,  and,  after  lengthy 
deliberation,  appointed  an  energetic  committee  to  prepare  bills  for  present- 
ation to  the  Legislature,  the  passage  of  which  might  afford  relief.  These 
bills  have  been  carefully  formulated  and  revised  by  this  committee,  and  by 
the  Irrigation  Committees  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly,  aided  by  suggestions 


61 


from  others  interested  in  the  subject,  until  they  are  now  believed  to  meet  the 
necessities  of  the  situation  as  nearly  as  possible.  The  irrigators  of  the  State, 
almost  without  dissent,  are  satisfied  that  if  these  bills  become  laws,  they 
will  establish  the  right  to  use  of  water  for  irrigation,  and  will  lay  the  found- 
ation of  a  wise  system  of  regulating  such  use,  which  can  be  perfected  in  the 
light  of  experience. 

Very  few  in  the  Legislature  will  have  the  courage  to  openly  oppose  these 
bills  in  the  face  of  the  universal  demand  for  their  passage  by  the  people, 
irrespective  of  party.  The  policy  of  the  small  opposition  is  delay.  The  bills 
have  been  made  the  special  order  for  to-morrow  in  both  houses,  when  the 
effort  to  obstruct  this  important  and  much  needed  legislation  will  probably 
be  renewed. 

The  people  will  not  be  satisfied  with  the  passive  votes  of  their  representa- 
tives upon  the  bills  themselves.  They  look  for  active  support,  which  shall 
push  these  measures  to  the  front,  suppress  delay,  and  bring  each  bill  to  a 
vote  on  its  passage  before  adjournment.  If  they  fail,  Southern  California 
will  have  no  politics  but  irrigation.  In  the  time  coming,  the  highest  recom- 
mendation to  the  people  of  that  section  will  be  a  record  of  faithful  and  active 
support  of  the  measures  proposed  by  the  irrigators.  They  will  deal  political 
death  to  those  who  fail  them  on  this  question. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

The  Irrififation  Bills. 

When  we  in  this  country  speak  of  the  common  law  of  England,  we  mean 
the  great  body  of  law  which  grew  up  by  degrees  out  of  the  varying  wants  and 
conditions  of  the  British  people,  and  was  rather  a  compendium  of  established 
customs  than  a  body  of  statutes.  Bracton  entitles  his  great  work  on  the  com- 
mon law,  "Of  the  Laws  and  Customs  of  England."  And  all  writers  point 
out  as  the  chief  merit  of  the  common  law  its  flexibility  and  adaptability  to 
different  conditions  and  necessities.  It  was  in  effect  a  judicial  and  not  a  leg- 
islative expression  of  what  was  fair  and  reasonable  in  view  of  all  the  circum. 
stances  of  the  case.  Applying  this  definition  of  the  common  law  to  section 
4468  of  the  Political  Code,  the  meaning  of  that  section  would  seem  to  be  that 
judges  in  this  State  were  to  pursue  the  course  which  judges  in  England  pur- 
sued when  new  cases,  involving  new  wants  and  new  clashings  of  interests 
came  before  them ;  that  is  to  say,  they  were  to  decide  on  broad  general  prin- 
ciples of  equity  and  the  public  good.  If  England  had  been  a  rainless  coun- 
try, like  Southern  California,  the  wants  of  farmers  would  have  led  to  "cus- 
toms" of  irrigation,  and  the  courts  would  by  their  decisions  have  given  to 
these  customs  the  force  of  law.  They  would  have  constituted  part  of  the 
''common  law." 


62 


Los  Gatos  Mail. 

The  Irrigation  Q,nestion. 

The  bountiful  rains  in  this  part  of  the  State  save  us  from  the  troublesome 
necessity  of  irrigation.  Ir,  however,  we  had  but  four  inches  of  rain  scattered 
through  the  season,  so  that  scarce  a  grain  of  wheat  would  sprout,  the  matter 
■would  be  of  great  importance  to  us.  This  is  the  condition  of  San  Joaquin 
Valley,  south  of  Stockton,  embracing  a  country  three  hundred  miles  long  and 
from  one  to  two  hundred  miles  wide,  containing  one-fifth  of  the  area  of  the 
State.  The  most  of  this  land,  with  rains  or  irrigation,  is  capable  of  produc- 
ing large  crops.  The  Fresno  Colony  is  an  instance  to  this  point.  Water 
enough  falls  on  the  mountains  above,  if  it  were  impounded  and  utilized,  to 
irrigate  this  whole  tract.  If  settled  as  thickly  as  many  countries  in  Europe 
and  cultivated  as  highly,  10,000,000  people  would  live  in  comfort  on  it.  Ac- 
cording to  the  decisions  of  the  courts,  some  one,  or  any  one,  who  lives  on  the 
streams  may  demand  that  no  water  shall  be  taken  from  the  channel;  that  all 
shall  run  to  the  sea. 


Grass  Valley  Tidings. 

Burning'  Question. 

The  Colusa  Sun  says  of  irrigation  that  it  is  the  "Burning  Question."  The 
Sun  is  perhaps  right.  It  is  a  question  whether  the  policy  should  be  to  con- 
tinue to  let  onr  vast  plains  burn  every  summer  season,  or  whether  by  the 
proper  distribution  of  water  those  plains  shall  be  made  fresh  and  green  and 
beating  all  kinds  of  crops.  There  is  plenty  of  water  for  the  purpose  of  mak- 
ing all  these  dry  plains  into  gardens,  and  never  was  water  in  any  land  better 
situated  for  easy  and  cheap  distribution.  But  there  are  a  few  men  who  live 
by  the  side  of  natural  streams,  and  those  men  want  the  water  to  run  along 
by  their  lands  and  not  turn  a  wheel  or  give  life  to  the  germ  of  a  single 
seed.  And  these  few  men  seem  to  have  the  advantage  of  the  contest.  They 
are  backed  by  an  old  law  made  for  another  and  a  different  country,  and  in 
an  age  when  machinery  was  not  used,  and  when  irrigation  was  but  little  un- 
derstood. 


Watsonville  Pajaronian. 

The  Legislature  has  at  last  taken  up  the  consideration  of  the  irrigation 
question.  The  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  reversing  Judge  Brundage's 
decision  in  the  case  of  Miller  &  Lux  vs.  Haggin  &  Carr,  has  created  a  feel- 
ing of  uncertainty  among  the  settlers  in  the  San  Joaquin,  Los  Angeles  and 
San  Bernardino  valleys,  and  through  their  representatives  they  are  appeal- 
ing to  the  Legi8lature  to  set  at  rest  this  vexed  question  of  water  rights.  For 
years  the  settlers  in  the  San  Joaquin  and  southern  sections  have  been,  by 
canals,  diverting  the  waters  of  their  sections  from  their  usual  channels,  and 
thereby  have  cultivated  extensive  tracts  of   land,  and  have  increased  the 


63 


resources  and  productions  of  the  State.  The  settlers  are  known  as 
appropriationists,  and  they  have  made  the  desert  part  of  this  State  produc- 
tive. Prior  to  them  were  the  stockmen.  They  did  not  molest  the  flow  of 
Tivers.  They  did  not  want  the  laud  tilled.  They  used  the  land  for  pastur- 
age, and  the  rivers  were  the  drinking  resorts  of  cattle.  With  the  adveut  of 
the  farmer  the  bounds  of  the  stockmen  were  narrowed,  land  became  more 
yaluable,  and  the  herdsmen  had  to  show  title  for  what  he  claimed.  The 
two  interests  clashed,  and  trumping  up  the  water  question  the  stockmen 
have  attempted  to  cripple  the  farmers.  The  colonists  of  the  San  Joaquin 
and  southern  valleys,  after  years  of  untiring  labor  and  expense,  have  com- 
pleted a  vast  irrigating  spstem,  and  have  made  the  desert  lauds  of  the  Joa- 
quin and  southern  sections  bear  bounteously  in  fruit,  grain,  etc.  They  have 
organized  thriving  colouies.  They  have  built  up  towns  and  counties.  They 
have  increased  the  wealth  of  the  State.  Their  towns  show  an  air  of  pros- 
perity. They  have  converted  the  cattle  ranges  into  cultivated  land.  They 
have  their  homes,  churches  and  school  houses.  They  are  thriving  and  pros- 
perous. The  cattle  king  did  nothing  but  raise  cattle.  He  added  not  to  the 
wealth  of  the  State.  He  kept  out  immigration.  He  made  neither  towns 
nor  homes.  He  allowed  the  rivers  fed  by  the  snows  of  the  Sierras  to  run 
to  waste  year  after  year.  He  claimed  the  land  along  the  rivers  and 
claims  the  water.  Against  him  is  the  appropriatiug  farmer,  who  believes 
that  the  water  should  moisten  the  soil  and  cause  it  to  bear  as  nature  intended 
it  should.  The  Legislature  is  now  discussing  this  water  question,  and  in  its 
treatment  should  consider  the  relative  worth  and  importance  of  the  farming 
and  stock  interests.  A  victory  for  Miller  &  Lux  means  stoppage  of  the 
development  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  and  ruin  to  thousands  of  now  pros- 
perous settlers  in  that  section.  A  victory  for  the  farmers  means  increased 
development  of  every  part  of  the  State,  increased  immigration  and  increased 
prosperity.     The  irrigation  question  should  be  settled  this  session. 

There  is  water  enough  for  all  here  if  properly  utilized,  and  it  is  not  right 
to  make  a  desert  of  thousands  of  square  miles  of  fertile  land  in  order  to 
allow  a  few  men  to  tie  up  large  streams  of  water  that  may  be  made  to  convert 
small  area  in  to  a  garden. 

Pacific  Rural  Press. 

Irriffation  Legislation. 

It  is  probably  clear  by  this  time,  if  it  was  not  before,  that  the  problems 
are  affected  by  an  unmeasured  multitude  of  conditions.  No  doubt  the 
committee  of  the  Fresno  Convention  realized  this  while  they  were  drafting 
their  proposed  enxctmen  s,  and  subsequent  discussion  has  doubtless  con- 
vinced them  that  there  are  still  other  conditions  to  be  met  with  which  they 
have  not  dreamed  of.  We  infer  this  much  from  the  fact  that  they  have 
already  modified  the  bills  which  they  had  prepared,  and  they  seem  to  be 
actuated  by  a  desire  to  secure  what  is  necessary  for  their  success,  with  as 
little  as  possible  of  injury  to  others.  In  the  bills  which  they  prepared  they 
5 


64 


aimed  to  set  forth,  not  new  theories  and  doctrines,  but  rather  to  embody  the 
■wisdom  which  has  been  gained  from  experience  in  other  States  which  have 
preceded  our  own  in  the  progress  toward  a  systematic  arrangement  of  mat- 
ters  affecting  irrigation.  Colorado  is  such  a  State.  She  has  advanced  far 
beyond  us,  we  understand,  in  the  area  irrigated  and  the  capital  directly  in- 
vested in  such  enterprises,  and  her  law-making  bodies  have  struck  upon 
pioneer  ground  in  irrigation  legislation.  The  results  of  this  experience  are^ 
of  course,  of  much  value  as  data  in  settling  our  own  problems.  It  is  fortu- 
nate that  a  body  of  men  like  the  Fresno  Convention  have  been  found  to  give 
their  time  and  insight  to  the  work  of  preparing  bills  for  the  discussion  of 
the  whole  State.  We  trust  that  the  wisdom  which  has  come  in  large 
measure  from  other  quarters  may  be  of  avail  in  supplementing  work  which 
they  did,  and  in  giving  us  laws  which  shall  be  fit  to  secure  the  grand  result 
which  is  being  labored  for,  to  wit:  the  development  of  our  irrigation  enter- 
prises, the  rescue  of  still  greater  areas  from  wild  worthlessness  to  rich  pro- 
duction, the  multiplication  of  homes  on  waste  lands  and  the  consequent 
duplication  of  the  vested  wealth  of  the  commonwealth. 


The  Gait  Weekly  Gazette. 

A  proper  system  of  irrigation,  by  which  the  broad  and  fertile  acres  of  the 
Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  Valleys  could  be  irrigated,  would  prove  invalu- 
able and  of  paramount  importance  to  this  State.  The  subject  deserves  atten- 
tion, and  it  is  to  be  hoped  our  able  statesmen  in  the  present  Legislature  will 
devise  some  means  by  which  the  State  can  provide  for  and  perfect  a  system 
of  irrigation  sufficient  to  procure  an  abundance  of  water  for  this  purpose. 


Modesto  Herald. 

The  irrigation  question  seems  to  be  the  heavy  problem  of  the  present 
session  of  the  Legislature.  It  is  one  of  vast  importance  to  a  large  portion  of 
the  State,  and  many  of  the  members  are  pledged  to  use  their  influence  to  have 
a  law  passed  practically  condemning  all  the  water-rights  now  in  existence, 
thus  abolishing  the  old  common  law  and  appropriating  all  the  streams  to  the 
use  of  those  who  wish  to  divert  it  to  productive  uses.  Riparian  owners  are 
fighting  the  measure. 

Kern  County  Californian. 

The  newspapers  of  the  State  outside  the  districts  where  irrigation  is  prac- 
ticed seem  slow,  says  the  Colusa  Sun,  to  grasp  the  problem  of  irrigation. 
We  must  exempt  from  this  remark  the  Alia,  Chronicle,  and  Examiner,  of  San 
Francisco.  We  print  to-day  an  article  from  the  latter  paper  which  shows  a 
broad  comprehension  of  the  whole  situation.  We  also  print  a  very  excellent 
article  from  the  Sacramento  Sunday  Capital.    The  Bee  has  assumed  a  par- 


65 


tisan  attitude  against  the  irrigators,  and  the  Record-Union  is  mum.  Now  is 
the  time  for  men  to  show  their  hands.  No  man  need  stick  his  head  up  in  the 
politics  of  the  State  who  now  arrays  himself  against  this  great  interest. 
The  man  whose  brain  is  too  small  to  see  and  to  comprehend  the  vastness  of 
this  subject — to  see  the  wealth  that  must  follow  good  laws  and  the  poverty 
which  must  come  of  not  acting — must  expect  no  recognition  at  the  hands  of 
the  people.  We  warn  ambitious  men  in  the  Legislature  that  against  each 
name  a  "lasting  record  stands  for  glory  or  for  shame!" 


Kern"Co.  Californian. 

In  another  place  we  give  a  well-considered  article  from  the  Alta,  entitled 
**  Importance  of  Irrigation,"  which  ought  to  awaken  the  people  of  San  Fran- 
cisco to  the  necessity  of  bringing  their  influence  to  bear  upon  the  Legislature 
in  the  way  of  enacting  laws  to  protect  and  promote  the  irrigation  interests  of 
the  State,  now  seriously  threatened,  to  the  serious  injury  of  that  city,  as  will 
be  seen  by  those  directly  interested  in  its  growth  and  prosperity,  if  they  will 
but  consider  the  subject.  The  views  taken  in  the  article  in  question  should 
be  strenuously  and  persistently  urged  by  every  journal  in  the  city.  The 
Alta  has  always  enunciated  correct  views  on  this  great  subject  of  irrigation, 
which  it  has  been  the  first  of  the  city  papers  to  see  is  of  paramount  import- 
ance, and  we  expect  with  coufidence  that  it  will  be  an  advocate  as  strenuous 
as  it  is  powerful  of  the  measures  that  will  be  introduced  into  the  Legislature 
■with  the  endorsement  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation 
Convention. 


San  Francisco  Alta. 

Importance  of  Irrigfation. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  business  of  Sm  Francisco  has  been  very  much 
depressed  for  the  last  six  months.  Trade  has  been  more  nearly  in  a  condition 
of  stagnation  than  for  a  long  time  past,  and  our  manufactories  have  had  diffi- 
culty in  finding  work  for  their  usual  number  of  operatives  and  paying  them 
the  accustomed  rate  of  wages.  Those  who  have  goods  have^been  unable  to  sell 
them,  and  those  who  have  money  have  been  unable  to  loan  it.  The  banks 
are  overrun  with  idle  capital,  for  enterprise  is  paralyzed  and  confidence  de- 
stroyed. This  was  the  condition  of  things  during  the  greater  part  of  1884, 
and  though  with  the  coming  of  the  new  year  a  few  rifts  through  the  clouds 
appear,  the  state  of  trade  is  very  unsatisfactory.  Our  commercial  bodies 
have  been  conducting  investigations  into  the  causes  of  the  depression  and  in- 
quiring what  can  be  done  to  hasten  a  revival.  As  San  Francisco's  prosperity 
is  dependent  on  the  prosperity  of  the  country  regions  in  which  she  finds  a 
market  for  her  goods,  it  is  evident  that  no  remedy  for  the  trade  depression 
will  be  effective  which  is  not  sufficiently  far  reaching  to  touch  and  revive  the 
drooping  industries  of  the  interior  of  this  State,  as  well  as  the  contiguous 
States  and  Territories. 


66 


As  one  amoog  the  ways  in  which  prosperity  in  the  farming  regions  can  be 
stimnlated,  the  importance  of  settling  the  irrigation  difficulties  that  have 
hung  like  a  cloud  over  the  progress  of  half  (he  State,  cannot  be  overrated. 
Capital  is  waiting  to  take  up  the  work  of  improvement  as  soon  as  it  is  given 
the  protection  of  the  law's,  to  the  extent  that  capital  in  other  enterprises  is 
protected,  but  until  that  is  done  it  will  not  move  hand  or  foot.  The  projjec- 
tion  which  capital  asks  is  merely  a  sound  title  to  what  it  creates,  which  it 
cannot  obtain  in  the  present  anomalous  condition  of  the  laws,  Fresno  county 
and  Tulare  county  have  each  invested  $1,000,000  in  irrigation  ditches;  Kern 
county  has  invested  $2,000,000,  and  other  counties  proportionate  sums,  and 
at  least  1,500,000  acres  of  land  are  now  cultivated  by  irrigation.  These  are 
the  most  prosperous  districts  in  the  State;  the  lands  are  divided  into  small 
farms,  and  the  owners  are  making  money.  The  success  of  the  operation  is 
demonstrated,  and  the  work  of  irrigation  will  commence  on  a  far  larger  scale 
as  soon  as  the  legal  difficulties  that  have  been  gradually  thickening  around 
the  irrigators,  and  which  have  finally  culminated  in  the  riparian  rights  de- 
cision of  the  Supreme  Court,  are  definitely  settled.  Not  only  is  there  a  cer- 
tainty that  without  legislation  the  progress  of  turning  deserts  into  oases  will 
stop,  but  there  is  danger  that  what  has  been  accomplished  will  be  undone,  if 
this  fatal  decision  stands  and  its  sweeping  effects  are  not  evaded  by  some 
flank  movement  of  legislation.  The  irrigators  have  powerful  enemies  to 
contend  with,  and  among  the  most  powerful  are  procrastination  and  petti- 
fogging. Legislatures  kill  by  indirection  measures  which  they  dislike  to 
openly  oppose,  unless  a  strong  public  demand  -for  the  passage  of  the  irriga- 
tion law  is  made,  and  there  is  danger  that  it  may  share  the  fate  of  many  other 
meritorious  bills  that  have  been  "nibbled  to  death  by  pissmires  and  kicked 
to  death  by  grasshoppers."  It  is  the  duty  as  much  as  the  interest  of  San 
Francisco  to  assist  in  creating  this  public  demand. 


S.    F.    Examiner. 

Be^rare  of  Delay.  ' 

Two  important  irrigation  bills  now  before  the  Legislature  will  come  up  in 
the  Assembly  this  evening  as  a  special  order.  The  importance  of  the  subject 
to  a  large  proportion  of  the  people  of  the  State  cannot  be  over-estimated, 
and  the  representatives  of  the  people  should  bring  them  to  a  speedy  passage. 
It  will  not  do  for  any  mentber  who  favors  continued  postponement  to  say 
that  he  is  in  favor  of  the  bills  and  will  vote  for  them  when  reached.  Who- 
ever advocates  such  action  is  no  better  than  the  most  malignant  foe.  The 
late  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  has  stabbed  Southern  California  near  to 
the  heart,  and  her  people  are  calling  upon  this  Legislature  to  stanch  the 
gaping  wound.  It  will  soon  be  too  late.  Nothing  but  instant  action  will 
avail.  The  few  selfish  riparianists  counsel  delay.  They  know  that  further 
delay  is  their  only  hope  for  success.  Their  argument  is,  that  the  subject 
should  receive  long  consideration,  and  that  sixty  days  is  too  short  a  time  in. 


67 


which  to  reacli  a  conclusion ;  and  that  will  be  their  argument  at  the  next 
session,  and  yet  the  next,  provided  they  carry  out  their  plans  now.  There 
will  never  come  a  time  when  the  Legislature  will  be  better  informed  than 
now.  The  necessity  of  this  legislation  will  never  be  greater  than  at  this 
moment.  The  irrigators,  large  and  small,  may  reasonably  anticipate  a 
cyclone  of  injunctions  against  the  use  of  water,  after  adjournment,  without 
legislation.  In  another  two  years,  without  water,  every  leaf  and  stalk  of 
vegetation  now  thriving  from  irrigation  will  have  shriveled  and  withered  to 
the  dust  from  which  it  came.  The  just  wrath  of  a  ruined  community  can- 
not be  appeased  if,  in  answer  to  its  demand  why  nothing  was  done,  their 
representatives  reply  that  the  time  was  too  short  for  careful  consideration. 
The  history  of  the  American  people  shows  that  they  have  endured  great 
wrongs  with  patient  submission  rather  than  resist  oppressive  laws  other  than 
by  authorized  methods.  But  the  instinct  of  self-preservation  is  strong  in 
communities  as  well  as  in  individuals.  If  the  wisdom  and  good  will  of  this 
Legislature  do  not  unite  to  save  the  State  from  the  evils  of  riparianism,  the 
people  will  condemn  at  the  ballot-box  all  who  openly  oppose  the  irrigation 
bills,  and  all  who  hypocritically  pretend  to  favor  them,  but  counsel  or  assist 
in  delay,  which  is  tantamount  to  defeat. 


S.  F.  Alta. 

Move  tliem^Up. 

The  overwhelming  majorities  by  which  the  irrigation  bills  have  been  made 
the  special  order  for  Monday  afternoon  in  both  houses,  gives  gratifying  evi- 
dence that  the  Legislature  realizes  the  great  necessity  of  the  hour.  To-day 
the  irrigation  interests  of  the  State  are  in  a  condition  of  paralysis,  due  to  the 
uncertainty  of  the  law  of  water  rights,  and  to  the  possibility  that  the  law  as 
it  stands  may  be  construed  to  their  destruction.  If  this  condition  of  things 
continues  the  ruin  of  property  in  Southern  California,  and  the  consequent 
decimation  of  the  population  of  that  section,  will  soon  have  its  natural  effect 
on  the  commercial  pulse  of  the  State. 

The  merchants  and  manufacturers  of  San  Francisco  are  accustomed  to 
tracing  the  causes  of  activity  or  stagnation  of  business.  They  know  that  the 
development  of  Southern  California  is  greatly  to  their  interest,  and  that  the 
arrest  of  irrigation  and  the  resulting  destruction  of  property  can  only  be 
productive  of  loss  to  the  business  of  this  city.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that 
such  a  state  of  affairs  is  the  inevitable  consequence  of  a  failure  by  this  Legis- 
lature to  come  to  the  rescue. 

The  irrigators  know  what  they  need.  They  assembled  in  convention  at 
Riverside  and  Fresno,  and  agreed  upon  the  outlines  of  a  plan  for  their  salva- 
tion. This  plan  was  crystallized  into  the  form  of  several  bills,  which,  after 
having  received  thoughtful  consideration  by  men  of  practical  experience  and 
learning,  and  modified  so  as  to  avoid  objections  made  from  time  to  time,  are 
now  being  urged  in  the  Legislature.   The  loss  to  San  Francisco  by  the  failure 


to  pass  these  bills  cannot  be  estimated.  No  business  man  can  aflford  to  risk 
the  experiment  of  trying  to  get  along  two  years  more  without  this  legislation. 
This  Legislature  is  about  to  make  history  of  it>elf  upon  this  subject. 

The  journals  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly  will  become  interesting  reading 
to  this  mercantile  community  when  Southern  California  shall  have  become 
a  burden  to  the  State  by  the  failure  of  these  measures.  The  San  Francisco 
delegation  should  not  be  dilatory  in  their  support.  Immediate  action  is 
what  is  wanted.  The  session  is  nearly  ended,  and  the  bills  should  be  ad- 
vanced to  the  place  to  which  their  importance  entitles  them  —second  to  none. 


Fresno  Republican. 

The  Riparian  Sack. 

The  Sacramento  Capital  of  February  8th,  says: 

"  The  Irrigation  Committeemen  have  been  hard  at  work  all  the  week,  but  it 
is  very  much  feared  that  the  riparian  men  have  captured  the  Legislature,  as  it 
is  known  they  are  spending  a  great  deal  of  money  to  defeat  the  most  import- 
ant measures  that  have  come  before  the  body  during  this  session.  It  is  a 
well  known  fact  that  the  appropriators  have  but  little  or  no  money  to  spend 
on  the  fight,  as  they  represent  the  bone  and  vim  of  the  southern  part  of  the 
State,  while  the  large  landholders  are  backed  by  some  of  the  wealthiest  cor- 
porations in  tbe  State.  If  the  bill  does  not  pass,  the  people  may  rest  assured 
that  money  defeated  it. 

We  do  not  believe  that  the  riparian  sack  has  done  the  work  which  our  con- 
temporary apprehends  it  has.  The  members  of  this  Legislature  can  better 
aflford  to  defeat  the  will  of  the  people  on  any  other  question  than  that  of  irri- 
gation. The  legislator  who  now  puts  himself  on  record  as  opposed  to  irriga- 
tion in  California  will  have  hanged  a  millstone  about  his  neck,  which  will 
grow  heavier  as  time  and  experience  prove  that  he  either  had  not  the  brains 
or  the  honesty  to  support  measures  upon  which  the  material  welfare  of  the 
State  depends  as  upon  no  other  issue  that  has  ever  been  submitted  to  a  legis- 
lative body  in  this  State.  There  are  undoubtedly  men  in  the  Legislature  who 
would  sell  anything  they  have  on  earth  for  coin,  but  we  are  not  yet  prepared 
to  believe  that  a  majority  of  this  legislative  body  will  deliberately  sell  the 
interests  of  the  people  to  a  few  land-grabbing  monopolists  and  cattle  kings, 
who  will,  if  this  Legislature  sells  them  the  power,  own  the  waters  of  natural 
streams  in  California,  and  at  their  pleasure  can  change  the  fruitful  and  bloom- 
ing valleys  back  into  desert  stock  ranges  or  exact  tribute  from  the  humble 
tillers  of  the  soil  whose  farms  and  homes  depend  for  existence  upon  the  right 
to  use  the  surplus  waters  that  under  the  common  law  belong  to  the  last  man 
on  the  stream.  It  is  no  idle  threat  when  we  say  that  every  man  in  this  Leg- 
islature who  falls  down  before  the  golden  calf  of  the  riparian  monopolists 
will  be  a  marked  man  in  politics  in  this  State.  He  who^betrays  the  cause  of 
the  people  in  this  fight  is  essentially  either  a  fool  or  a  knave,  and  the  chances 
are  a  hundred  to  one  he  is  the  latter.     The  situation  is   so  keenly  defined 


69 


that  a  legislator,  thoiigh  lie  be  a  fool,  need  not  err  therein.  It  is  simply  a 
question  of  right,  justice  and  the  State's  welfare  against  the  corrupting  power 
of  wealth  and  greed. 

The  Fresno  Expositor. 

The  Great  Issue. 

The  San  Francisco  industries  languish.  Her  merchants  complain  of  hard 
times.  The  Chamber  of  Commerce  and  Board  of  Trade  have  appointed  com- 
mittees to  examine  into  and  report  on  the  causes  of  the  present  depression. 
The  committees  have  not  reported,  and  when  they  do  we  doubt  whether  they 
will  arrive  at  the  actual  facts.  But  to  one  who  does  not  belong  to  the  com- 
mittee, and  is  not  a  member  of  either  of  the  great  city's  Commercial  Boards, 
the  causes  of  the  dullness  of  trade  are  very  apparent.  The  stoppage  of  the 
mines  under  the  debris  decisions  and  the  natural  and  gradual  decline  of  that 
business  has  done  much  to  reduce  business  in  San  Francisco,  as  all  of  the 
supplies  of  the  miners  are  purchased  there.  The  completion  of  the  several 
trans-continental  railroads  is  another  cause.  The  Northern  Pacific  has  taken 
away  the  Oregon  and  Washington  Territory  trade,  while  the  Southern  Pacific 
has  changed  that  of  the  southern  counties  to  the  East.  These  are  the  main 
causes  of  the  stagnation  in  business  at  the  Bay.  But  these  depressions  will 
be  only  temporary  if  San  Franciscans  are  true  to  their  interests.  Let  them 
rally  to  the  aid  of  the  farmers  in  San  Joaquin  Valley,  and  urge  the  passage  of 
needed  irrigation  laws,  and  they  will  soon  see  an  empire  built  up  that  will 
cause  San  Francisco  to  flourish  as  it  never  has  before.  The  San  Francisco 
*'Alta"h*is  a  true  conception  of  the  situation.  In  a  late  editorial  it  says  to 
its  readers:  "Every  business  interest  that  San  Francisco  possesses,  whether 
commercial  or  manufacturing,  will  be  benefited  by  the  removal  of  the  obsta- 
cles to  the  cultivation  of  the  great  interior  valleys  and  their  increase  of  wealth 
and  population.  San  Francisco  is  now  suffering  from  lack  of  markets,  and 
those  noble  valleys,  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin,  are  the.  places  where 
they  may  be  built  up — markets  at  our  own  door — markets  which  Chicago  and 
St.  Louis  can  never  take  away  from  us.  Combined,  the  Sacramento  and  San 
Joaquin  vallejs  have  an  area  as  large  as  Ireland,  or  about  32,000  square  miles. 
No  similar  area  in  the  world  is  capable  of  supporting  a  denser  population  than 
these  valleys,  and  if  they  were  to-day  peopled  as  closely  as  the  nation  of 
Belgium,  they  would  contain  15,000,000  souls.  This  is  sufficient  to  show 
what  a  commercial  empire  we  have  right  here  at  our  doors  if  we  develop  it 
rightly.  It  would  be  preposterous  folly  for  San  Francisco  to  fail  to  do  any- 
thing that  lies  in  her  power  to  aid  in  the  multiplication  of  small  farms  in 
the  valleys  and  the  bringing  of  them  to  a  high  state  of  cultivation;  while  to 
offer  direct  opposition  to  anything  that  tends  in  this  direction  is  simply- 
suicidal." 


70 


Sunday  Morning  Capital  CSacramento). 

The  Same  Old  Opposition. 

The  opposition  to  irrigation  and  to  the  pending  measures  concerning  it 
before  the  Legislature,  comes  from  the  same  source  as  the  opposition  to  the 
"No  Fence  Laws"  when  under  discussion  some  years  since  by  the  same 
body.  The  owners  of  the  great  cattle  ranches  of  the  upper  San  Joaquin 
valley  all  fought  the  "No  Fence  Laws"  just  as  they  are  to-day  fighting  the 
proposed  "Irrigation  Legislation."  They  are  using  the  same  general  argu- 
ment they  used  then,  namely,  the  damage  they  assert  would  result  to  the 
cattle  business.  Aud  as  a  final  parallelism  in  the  contest  the  same  argument 
of  a  sound  and  true  public  policy,  that  which  is  the  object  of  law  to  secure 
and  conserve,  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,  overcame  this  one 
interest  claim,  and  the  "No  Fence  Law"  was  enacted  just  as  a  favoring 
"Irrigation  Law"  should  now  be  enacted.  The  three  things  which  make  a 
State  powerful,  prosperous  and  enlightened  are  a  great  population,  a  great 
aggregation  of  wealth,  and  the  nearest  practicable  equable  distribution  of  the 
latter  among  the  individuals  of  the  population  so  that  the  extremes  of  material 
condition  shall  not  be  the  rule.  It  is  the  object  of  a  true  public  policy  to 
secure  these  ends.  California  can  never  make  either  commerce  or  manu- 
facture the  leading  interest  of  the  State,  for  in  these  respects,  great  as  are 
our  natural  advantages,  other  countries  and  other  States  have  far  greater,  and 
in  the  race  for  supremacy  have  a  lead  which  cannot  be  overcome.  Agricul- 
ture must  then  be  the  source  from  which  must  come  the  elements  of  our 
greatness  and  prosperity,  and  our  laws  must  be  such  as  shall  favor  it  in  every 
way  possible.  The  amount  of  land  available  for  agriculture  is  fixed  so  that- 
the  smaller  individual  holdings  the  greater  the  population  that  will  occupy  it, 
is  a  truth  which  it  requires  no  argument  to  demonstrate.  The  greater  the  net 
yield  of  each  acre  the  greater  becomes  the  aggregation  of  wealth  which  is  the 
portion  of  the  net  yield  not  consumed.  Small  land  holdings  favor  the  greatest 
possible  net  yield  per  acre,  and  from  this,  of  course,  the  greatest  possible  accu- 
mulation of  wealth  and  directly  the  equable  distribution  of  it.  Therefore 
should  those  branches  of  the  agricultural  industry  be  favored  which  conduce 
to  our  small  land  holdings.  The  cattle-raising  industry,  as  carried  on  in  this- 
State,  requires  large  land  holdings,  and,  of  all  agricultural  industries,  re- 
quires the  least  manual  labor  and  produces  the  smallest  net  return  per  acre. 
The  net  return,  of  course,  fixes  the  value  of  the  land,  and  in  the  cattle  in- 
dustry fixes  it  necessarily  very  low.  Cereal  culture  employs  the  labor  of 
several  families,  where  only  one  man  was  required  for  stock-raising,  and 
multiplies  many  times  the  net  return  per  acre,  and  of  course  makes  the  land 
much  more  valuable.  The  "No  Fence"  law  made  cereal  culture  practicable 
in  localities  where  before  it  was  only  possible  to  engage  in  the  stock-raising 
'  industry,  and  to  that  extent  has  increased  the  material  resources  of  the  State. 
Horticulture,  or  a  diversified  agricultural  industry,  will  employ  ten  or  even 
more  families  where  one  is  employed  producing  the  cereals,  and  will  give  ten 
and  even  twenty-five  times  the  net  return  per  acre,  making  the  land  propor- 


71 


tionately  more  valuable.  To  express  this  argument  roughly  in  a  land  formula, 
a  laud  holding  of  100  acres,  cultivated  horticulturally,  will  be  the  equivalent 
in  the  population  it  will  of  necessity  utilize,  in  its  net  return,  and  its  abso- 
lute monetary  value,  of  1000  acres  cultivated  in  the  cereals,  or  of  10,000  acres 
employed  in  stock-raising.  Can  anyone  gainsay  but  that  the  material  condi- 
tion of  the  people  under  the  first-named  condition  is  better  than  under  either 
of  the  last  two?  nor  that  there  is  in  material  condition  any  vast  gulf  in  social 
and  intellectual  life  between  individuals  engaged  in  horticulture  as  exists 
between  the  non-resident  so-called  "  Cattle  King  "  and  the  serf  who  tends 
the  flocks  by  night.  Now,  if  these  premises  be  true,  it  is  incumbent  on  the 
State  to  foster  horticulture  and  a  diversified  agriculture,  even  if  thereby  the 
interests  of  the  stock-raisers  and  cereal  farmers  are  affected  injuriously.  No 
measure  is  more  calculated  to  serve  this  end  than  favoring  irrigation  legisla- 
tion, which  is  even  more  desirable  in  that  it  will  be  a  positive  benefit  to 
cereal  culture  and  to  the  stock  business.  So  far  as  wheat  is  concerned,  the 
experiment  has  been  tried,  and  land  that  would  return  only  ten  to  fifteen, 
bushels  an  acre,  with  uncertainty  even  as  to  that  much  from  year  to  year, 
irrigated  yields  sixty  with  certainty  of  the  maturing  every  crop,  For  the 
stock  business  with  irrigation  it  will  be  possible  to  grow  alfalfa,  which  can* 
not  under  our  natural  conditions  be  done  except  in  a  few  favored  localities, 
thus  securing  the  greatest  practicable  economy  of  land  in  that  branch.  But 
it  is  in  horticulture  and  the  diversified  agriculture  we  find  the  greatest  rela- 
tive and  absolute  gain  with  irrigation.  Its  possibilities  can  be  seen  within 
thirty  miles  of  Sacramento,  in  the  vicinity  of  Newcastle,  where  land  that 
ten  years  ago  was  considered  valueless,  or  nominally  held  at  $2.50  per  acre,  is 
now  worth  from  $100  and  upwards  an  acre,  is  producing  a  net  annual  income 
of  from  $100  to  $300  an  acre. 


The  Issue  of  the  Hour— Lucid  Letter  of  J.  Campbell  Shorb— Law  of  Ri- 
parian Ownership  vs.  the  Doctrine  of  Appropriation. 

Arfifniuent  in  Favor  of  the   Appropriation  Theory — The  Tito  Systemg  of 
Usin£^  Water  Contrasted— Reasons  and  Rhetoric. 

[The  following  letter  from  a  well-known  public  man  was  written  to  a 
State  Senator.  It  was  not  intended  for  publication.  It  was  printed  in  the 
Sacramento  Eecord- Union,  from  which  the  Times  copies  it,  as  an  intelligent, 
though  somewhat  ^florid,  discussion  of  a  subject  of  vital  interest  to  the 
people  of  Southern  California.  As  we  understand  it,  the  views  here  ex- 
pressed are  substantially  those  also  entertained  by  J.  De  Barth  Shorb,  who 
is  now  at  Sacramento,  laboring  to  procure  legislation  in  this  liue  on  the  ir- 
rigation subject. — Ed.  Times.] 

San  Francisco,  February  2,  1885. 

My  Dear  Friend — For  your  kind  and  very  prompt  favor  of  Saturday, 
please  accept  my  sincere  thanks.  Your  letter  struck  a  very  high  key  note^ 
which  it  sustained  to  the  end.  *  *  *  » 


72 


The  ■wisdom  which  consigned  the  shoemaker  to  his  last  has  never  been 
questioned,  never  will  be,  and  the  doctor  who  sticks  to  his  pills  may  attain 
spheres  of  eminence  and  success  denied  to  his  versatile  but  not  less  honest 
and  sensible  brother.  Condemned  by  painful  and  long-continued  illness  to 
abandon  the  active  duties  and  labors  of  my  professional  life,  my  search  for 
health  was  mostly  spent  in  the  northern  portion  of  this  great  State,  and  last 
March  I  had  the  luck  and  pleasure  of  attending  the  opening  of  the  first  formal 
convention  of  the  State  Irrigation  Society,  which  met  at  Kiverside,  in  San 
Bernardino  county,  in  March  last. 

I  don't  know  if  business  or  pleasure  ever  took  you  to  Riverside;  if  not 
I  trust  the  latter  soon  may,  for  business  might  hurry  you  away  without  giv- 
ing you  leisure  to  realize  what  Riverside  really  means,  the  beauty  it  com- 
prehends, the  wealth  it  represents,  the  homes  it  has  furnished,  the  comfort 
and  happiness  it  suggests,  its  future— but  here  I  halt!  The  sword  of  Dam- 
ocles hangs  over  its  head  and  its  hilt  is  in  the  hands  of  a  riparian  owner. 

But  let  me  return  to  the  convention!  I  met  men  there  from  the  East 
-and  West,  from  the  North,  and,  of  course,  from  the  South,  and  a  more 
thoroughly  practical,  devoted,  intelligent,  honest  and  unselfish  body  of  men 
I  never  saw  congregated  in  my  life. 

Knowing  there  were  antagonistic  elements  and  interests  there,  I  marveled 
at  the  harmony  which  prevailed  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  chap- 
ter. The  evidence  of  combustion  that  friction  is  almost  sure  to  develop 
was  nowhere  present. 

Now  long  anterior  to  this  time,  years  ago  I  had  the  honor  on  invitation, 
of  delivering  the  opening  address  of  "The  Southern  Horticultural  Society" 
in  Los  Angeles. 

I  called  attention  even  then  to  the  absolute  necessity  of  irrigation  and  the 
enactment  of  wise  and  satisfactory  legislation  as  vital  elements  of  the  pros- 
perity of  the  State  of  California,  particularly  the  southern  portion  of  it, 
where  mighty  tracts  of  noble  land  only  waited  the  advent  of  owners  and 
water  to  far  surpass  the  wildest  dreams  of  the  enthusiasts  in  the  marvelous 
returns  they  would  make  to  the  planters.  I  demonstrated  that  but  for  the 
wisdon:  which  inspired,  and  the  patriotism  and  industry  which  built  the 
stupendous  aqueducts  which  carried  the  fertilizing  waters  through  all  the 
diameter  of  the  historic  plain  to  the  north  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  the  countless 
millions  which  filled  the  territory  between  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  could 
never  have  been  supported  for  a  day.  The  pioneers  found  here,  in  the 
farthest  West  in  Califoruia,  conditions  which  prevailed  in  the  farthest  East 
"when  the  world  was  young,"  conditions  which  forced  primeval  man  to  do 
-exactly  what  we  are  doing  to-day,  conditions  which  inspired  the  building  of 
those  canals  whose  melancholy  ruins  the  traveler  finds  even  now  on  the 
desert  waste  between  the  rivers,  once  the  radiant  center  of  a  polished  race 
and  brilliant  civilization! 

My  study  of  irrigation  commenced  thus  years  ago,  and  has  never  been 
interrupted.    You  see  now,  my  dear  friend,  I'm  no  babbling  neophyte  in  the 


73 


department  of  science,  and  that  when,  in  that  dogmatic  way  I  said,  the 
other  day,  "the  riparian  law  won't  do,"  I  had  reason  for  the  faith  that  was 
within  me!  Besides,  I  know  of  no  law,  human  or  divine,  which  forbids  the 
cultivated  physician  from  prosecuting  the  study  and  investigation  of  a 
science  like  philanthropy,  a  science,  anyhow,  that  lies  so  close  to  his  own,  a 
science  of  which  medicine  is  but  a  single  rung  in  the  ladder,  a  rung  which 
does  not  mean  a  rest,  but  an  invitation  and  inspiration  to  climb,  which  the 
physician  must  accept  if  he  would  reach  that  height  and  distinction  attained 
by  Abou  Ben  Adhem,  when,  disappointed  with  the  angel's  answer,  he  won 
the  goal  at  last  when  he  told  Him,  "  Write  me,  then,  as  one  that  loved  his 
fellow-men." 

I  repeat,  when  I  spoke  so  boldly,  so  presumptuously,  of  the  riparian  law, 
it  was  not  the  fluffy  assertion  of  a  superficial  enthusiast,  the  vain  utterance 
of  a  selfish  and  empty  mind,  or  the  dogmatic  expression  of  ignorance,  preju- 
dice or  injustice. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  California  is  an  august  body  of  learned 
and  just  men.  This  Court  has  enunciated  its  views  on  the  question  of 
water  rights.  They  are  in  absolute  antagonism  to  my  own  views,  and  yet  I 
claim  and  know  that  I  reached  my  conclusions  as  honestly  and  conscien- 
tiously as  they  did,  and  yet  with  a  consciousness  of  demerit  which  does  not 
preclude  hope.  I  calmly  wait  the  relentless  arbitration  of  the  future  to  de- 
clare whose  conclusions  are  right  at  last. 

This  Court  expounds,  explains,  and  declares  the  law  for  us.  Now,  law  is 
or  ought  to  be,  in  its  sharpest  and  most  crystallized  expression,  the  system- 
atic recorded  decrees  of  common  sense  and  exact  justice;  and  when  I  find 
a  law,  no  matter  how  high  its  origin,  no  matter  how  learned  Uie  man  or  men 
who  enunciate  it,  no  matter  how  fair  it  seems,  how  sweet  it  reads,  no  matter 
how  buttressed  by  precedent  and  reverenced  by  age,  if  this  law  is  a  violation 
of  common  sense  and  an  outrage  on  justice,  it  is  no  law,  and  sooner  or  later 
it  will  be  wiped  out  of  existence. 

Let  us  quietly  contemplate  these  two  problems  that  now  seem  enveloped  in 
such  dense  obscurity,  dividing  ideas  and  opinions  in  reference  to  the  subject 
of  irrigation. 

I  know  not  if  you  run  a  mine,  own  an  orchard  or  vineyard,  or  own  a  flock 
of  sheep  or  cattle,  and  I'm  quite  sure  that  such  would  not  be  found  in  the  in- 
ventory of  my  realty.  My  home  is  where  I  hang  my  hat,  and  this  refreshing 
freedom  from  every  possession  that  might  embarass  temperate,  careful  and 
unselfish  investigation,  is  an  excellent  condition  and  preparation  for  wise 
judgment  and  just  conclusions. 

In  the  first  place,  the  two  interests  now  opposed  are  the  riparian  or  English 
idea,  and  the  appropriation  or  the  American  idea  and  interest.  The  first,  pure 
and  simple,  ordains  that  as  legislator,  judge  or  citizen,  we  must  accept  or 
adopt  the  laws  in  this  direction,  and  that  ownership  of  waters  in  a  natural 
stream  is  vested  in  the  man  who  owns  the  land  on  one  or  both  sides,  and  that 
this  partial  occupancy  makes  him  the  unqualified  owner  of  all  the  water. 


74 

which  must  be  kept  in  the  natural  channel  and  not  diverted  from  it  for  th^ 
good  of  his  neighbor  below,  no  matter  how  much  he  wastes  and  the  other 
wants. 

All  right!  That  he  has  some  interest  and  property  in  the  water,  no  one 
will  deoy,  but  how  much?  That  is  the  vital  question.  Now  we  will  stop  just 
here  for  a  moment  and  ask  to  what  end  and  purpose  does  the  riparian  owner 
devote  his  water?  To  his  cattle  and  sheep,  horses,  mules  and  pigs — in  a 
word,  to  his  stock. 

He  came  upon  the  stream  when  there  was  no  other  man  in  sight,  aud 
bought  largely  in  land  on  either  side  of  the  stream  and  built  himself  a  home. 
He  came  or  went  there  in  the  spring.  The  stream  was  running  bank  high. 
The  spring  wanes,  the  summer  comes  and  drags  its  slow  length  along,  and 
autumn,  hot  and  dry  and  dusty,  arrives.  The  stream  is  running,  but  it  is 
low  and  brackish,  evidently  unhealthy,  for  his  cattle,  drinking  it,  sicken  and 
die. 

But  let  us  suppose  that  it  is  running  still  full.  He  needs  other  water  for 
himself  and  family.  He  bores  a  well,*  and  up  from  subterranean  reservoirs 
comes  water  in  endless  quantities,  cold,  clear  and  healthy.  It  runs  to  waste 
on  the  ground;  millions  of  gallons  sink  back  into  the  earth  and  disappear  for- 
ever!   Not  a  blade  of  new  grass  marks  its  advent  or  disappearance. 

Now  comes  another  man  below  his  lines  of  possession  on  the  streanck 
and  buys  a  large  tract  of  land.  He  takes  water  where  it  is  running  to  wasta 
— of  no  benefit  to  anybody— and  carries  it  out  on  the  land,  and  further  and 
further  he  carries  it  as  long  as  it  will  run  or  flow.  The  laud,  before  sterile 
or  unproductive  for  want  of  water,  manifests  its  real  strength  a  ad  vigor,  and 
the  fields  grow  green  with  plentiful  promise — orchards  aud  vineyards  spring 
up  like  magic,  homes  multiply,  towns,  aye.,  almost  cities,  grow  up  like  Alad» 
din's  palace,  in  a  single  night;  temples,  dedicated  to  the  worship  of  the  ever- 
lasting God,  appear;  school  houses  are  built;  streets  and  roads  are  completed; 
stores  and  warehouses  are  being  rapidly  pushed  to  completion,  and  the 
gloomy,  uninviting,  unproductive  desert  blossoms  with  life  and  vigor,  prom- 
ise and  plenty ! 

But  we  will  go  back  for  a  moment  to  the  spot  where  the  appropriation  man 
began  his  lonely  enterprise.  He  was  working  to  feed  men,  women  and  chil- 
dren, and  not  cattle !  He  was  working  for  humanity,  and  not  for  droves  of 
horses  and  mules.  The  cattle  are  still  there,  roaming  upon  a  thousand  hills, 
sleek,  fat  and  healthy.  But  where  is  our  appropriation  man,  the  pioneer? 
Out  on  the  little  green  knoll,  surrounded  by  a  white  picket  fence,  sleeps  hi& 
last  sleep,  the  pioneer  who  began  this  work  of  progress  and  civilization,  and 
his  monument  is  seen-and  his  epitaph  is  read  in  the  cities,  on  the  plain,  in 
the  homes  and  hearts  of  the  people  who  swarm  over  this  once  lonesome  and 
desolate  desert.  He  had  worked  early  and  late  in  the  mists  of  the  morning 
and  beneaih  the  merciless  rays  of  an  almost  tropical  sun;  he  had  worked  in 
the  mud  aud  filth  to  dig  his  ditch  and  build  his  home,  living  on  the  coarsest 
fare  and  drinking  deadly  water,  with  the  fatal  malaria  rising  like  a  foul  steam. 


76 


all  around  him  from  the  earth  he  had  removed,  and  the  end  had  come  at  last! 
Why,  a  bronze  man,  with  heart  of  steel,  lungs  of  brass  and  ribs  of  iron  could 
not  have  delved  and  slaved  and  starved  without  wrecking  his  strength  and 
health  and  life  at  last!  ^  *  *  *  * 

And  now  comes  the  riparian  owner,  when  all  this  scheme  of  progress  is  on 
its  march  to  marvelous  consummation,  with  a  shotgun  in  one  hand  and  the 
judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  California  in  the  other,  and  tells  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  pioneer  dead  and  gone:  "Close  up  that  ditch,  and  turn  the  water 
back  into  its  natural  channel." 

Aye!  turn  it  back,  and  let  the  homes  built  upon  it  perish  from  the  earth. 
Let  the  cities  fall  to  ruin,  the  towns  disappear;  and  let  the  weeds  grow  again 
in  the  streets  and  roads.  Let  bankrupt  and  broken-hearted  men,  and  swarms 
of  women  and  children,  once  so  prosperous  and  happy  in  their  homes,  join 
their  beggar  husbands  and  seek  other  homes  and  places  for  the  future! 

Aye!  turn  it  back,  and  let  the  magnificent  illustration  of  peace  and  pro- 
gress and  plenty  be  transformed  once  more  into  a  howling  wilderness,  whose 
silence  and  solitude  shall  be  broken  only  by  the  lowing  of  the  herds  upon 
the  hills,  the  scream  of  the  coyote  ranging  for  food,  and  the  sullen  maledic- 
tions of  desperate  men  who  had  a  right  to  justice.  **  *  *  In  the 
name  of  Almighty  God,  shall  this  fearful  wrong  be  done?  In  the  awful 
name  of  Justice,  shall  this  nameless  sacrifice  be  consummated  in  her  very 
temple,  hard  by  the  blazing  lights  and  amid  the  perfumed  censers  of  her 
holiest  tabernacle?  In  the  name  of  Humanity,  shall  this  modern  illustra- 
tration  of  the  "  Slaughter  of  the  Innocents  "  be  allowed  to  blur  and  blot  and 
foul  the  fair  record  of  this  State  forever?  It  cannot,  it  must  not,  it  shall  not 
be  done,  for  the  people  will  not  allow  it  to  be  done! 

Have  I  overdrawn  the  picture  my  dear  friend?  Have  I  painted  in  too 
tragical  colors  the  truth  of  this  portentious  crisis? 

I  make  no  attempt  to  direct  your  views  or  bias  your  judgment,  for  I  know 
it  would  be  useless;  but  I  am  your  friend  and  want  to  remain  your  friend, 
and  will  believe  whatever  is  done  by  you  will  be  done  as  your  conscience 
directs.  But  I  beg  you  now  solemnly,  as  I  would  beg  my  brother,  make  no 
mistake  here! 

Eight  on  this  problem,  your  future  cannot  be  assailed.  You  will  stand 
before  this  people  by  far  the  most  powerful  man  in  the  State.  You  will  be 
honored,  loved  and  respected  by  thousands  whose  names  you  will  perhaps 
never  know,  and  when  that  hour  comes,  that  awful  hour  that  comes  soon  or 
late  to  all  men  born  of  woman,  the  hour  of  death,  it  will  be  full  of  perfect 
assurance  to  you,  full  of  honor  and  glory,  full  of  the  perfect  assurance  of 
speedy  and  eternal  reward,  of  which  none  is  higher  than  ^that  exhaled  from 
the  record  of  one  '*  who  loved  his  felloe-men." 

Your  friend  faithfully,  J.  Campbell  Shoes. 


76 


The  Colusa  Sun. 

Irrigation  Ijegislation. 

We  print  several  articles  on  the  first  page  on  the  subject  of  the  proposed  irri- 
gation laws;  but  what  subject  can  be  of  greater  importance?  We  have  been 
bending  all  our  efforts  for  the  last  two  months  towards  tr3uug  to  get  some 
laws  by  which  it  may  become  possible  for  the  people  to  take  water  from  the 
streams  to  be  used  for  irrigation.  This  would  seem  at  first  blush  to  be  an 
easy  job,  but  it  is  an  Herculean  task.  Many  conflicting  interests  were  to 
be  comprised,  and  some  could  not  be.  There  are  men  interested  in  having 
thousands  of  square  miles  of  land  remain  a  range  for  cattle;  then  there  are 
others  who  hold  lands  at  the  sinks  of  certain  rivers,  who  will  consent  to  the 
passage  of  no  law  on  the  subject.  The  common  law  of  England  gives  the 
whole  volume  of  the  stream  to  the  man  the  lowest  down,  and  that  man  is  in 
a  position  to  blackmail  all  above  him  at  will.  Then  "  low  down  "  claims  are 
millions,  nay  billions  of  money,  if  the  owners  are  allowed  to  dictate  their 
own  terms.  The  Fresno  Convention  tried  to  compromise  with  these  owners, 
but  could  not.  Then  the  "sack  "  came.  Men  who  had  favored  irrigation 
became  impressed  with  the  idea  that  the  qtiestion  was  so  complicated  that 
nothing  could  be  done.  Newspapers  that  professed  to  believe  in  irrigation 
could  find  nothing  but  lunacy  in  any  section  of  the  bill  proposed  by  those 
who  had  experience  with  the  question.  Some  progress  has  been  made;  the 
committee  of  the  assembly  on  Wednesday  evening  unanimously  recom- 
mended the  following  bill  for  passage: 

Section  1.     Section  1422  of  the  Civil  Code  of  this  State  is  hereby  repealed. 

Section  2.  Section  1422,  that  part  of  the  common  law  of  England,  which 
relates  to  riparian  rights,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  repugnant  and  inconsistent 
with  the  climate,  topography,  physical  condition,  and  necessities  of  the  peo- 
ple of  this  State,  and  the  laws  thereof,  concerning  the  appropriation  of  water 
for  purposes  of  irrigation,  and  to  that  extent  forms  no  part  of  such  laws;  and 
the  use  of  water  for  said  purposes  of  irrigation  is  a  public  use. 

Section  3.  Section  1423:  Any  person  who  deems  himself  damnified  by  the 
exercise  of  the  right  of  appropriation  of  water,  may  bring  suit  to  recover  dam- 
ages for  the  injury  sustained. 

Section  4.  Section  1424:  Any  person  contemplating  the  appropriation  of 
water  for  irrigation  purposes  may  acquire,  in  advance  or  at  any  other  time, 
property  necessary  or  proper  for  such  appropriation,  and  for  the  full  and 
complete  execution  and  enjoyment  of  such  appropriation,  by  proceedings 
under  Title  VII  of  Part  III  of  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure  of  this  State,  en- 
titled "Eminent  Domain." 

Sections.  Section  1425:  All  exigting  rights  of  appropriators  are  hereby 
confirmed. 


This  is  the  only  bill  that  has  any  reference  whatever  to  persons  otitside  of 
those  who  appropriate  and  use  water.  The  two  bills  which  are  to  follow, 
and  which  are  longer  than  this,  refer  exclusively  tQ  the  regulation  of  matters 


77 


between  irrigators.     There  must  be  either  a  right  to  appropriate  water  or  no 
right.     If  given,  it  must  be  in  plain,  unmistakable  language. 


Sacramento  Sunday  Capital. 

A  F«w^  Reasons— Some  Untold  Facts  About  Irrig^ation,  Etc.— How  Irriga- 
tion Acts  on  Desert  Land— Not  Necessary  to  Keep  up  a  Flow. 

The  discussion  of  irrigation  in  its  relation  to  the  industrial  interests  of  the 
State,  has  been  generally  with  reference  to  the  artificial  application  of  water 
to  the  surface  soil  as  taking  the  place  of  the  natural  precipitation  of  rain  ta 
the  extent  of  giving  both  surety  and  increase  of  production.  It  has  been  deal- 
ing with  direct  results  overlooking  certain  indirect  ones  as  being  either  of  rela- 
tively little  importance,  or  as  in  the  case  of  influence  on  the  navigable  streams, 
assuming  that  irrigation  may  be  carried  on  to  that  extent  that  an  injury  re- 
sults in  part  at  least  counter-balancing  some  of  the  direct  benefit.  It  is  the 
purpose  of  this  to  show  that  the  indirect  results  are  as  desirable  as  the  direct, 
that  they  are  of  great  importance,  aud  that  no  injury  can  result  to  the  naviga- 
ble rivers  no  matter  how  extensively  irrigation  may  be  carried  on.  Going 
into  the  foot-hills  and  examining  the  old  mining  canals  and  ditches  now  util- 
ized for  irrigation,  it  will  be  generally  noticed  that  a  very  large  proportion  of 
the  water  taken  in  at  the  head,  in  some  Ciises  as  much  as  one-half  disappears 
by  precolation  into  the  ground  through  which  the  ditch  passes.  That  this 
water  is  not  lost  is  evidenced  by  the  large  number  of  springs,  the  flow  of 
which  is  entirely  from  this  water;  for  let  no  water  be  running  in  the  ditch  for 
a  few  days  and  these  springs  either  run  dry  entirely,  or  flow  very  much 
Bmaller  streams.  Wells  under  the  line  of  the  ditches  become  dry  under  simi- 
lar circumstances.    It  is  from  springs  and  wells  under  these  conditions  that 

A  LARGE   PORTION 

Of  the  water  used  for  household  purposes  in  the  foot-hills  is  obtained,  so 
should  the  taking  of  water  into  tbese  ditches  be  stopped  it  would  not  alone 
take  away  almost  the  entire  productive  capacity  of  the  soil,  but  would  strike 
at  life  itself,  making  necessary  the  abandonment  of  many  homes  through  the 
impossibility  of  great  difficulty  of  obtaining  water.  This  is  no  fanciful  pic- 
ture of  imagination  but  a  realizible  fact  under  the  conditions  given.  Passing 
from  the  consideration  of  irrigation  in  the  foot-hills  to  it  on  the  plains  of  the 
great  valleys,  similar  indirect  results  are  observable.  On  the  higher  edge  of 
these  plains,  extending  from  the  hills  several  miles  out  into  the  valley,  the 
soil  is  more  often  than  otherwise  underlied  with  porous  strata.  The  soil  of  the 
rest  of  these  great  valley  plains  seems  to  rest  on  a  hard  pan  impervious  to 
water.  This  in  some  places  is  only  a  few  inches  below  the  surface,  in  others 
is  a  hundred  feet,  and  in  slope  is  toward  the  main  river  channel  depression, 
making  the  flow  of  the  underground  waters  take  that  direction.  All  of  the 
mountain  streams  in  crossing  tbat  part  of  the  valley  underlied  with  porous 
strata,  lose  a  fixed  amount  of  water,  different  with  different  streams,  of  which 


78 


the  greater  portion  most  get  under  the  hard  pan  referred  to  and  find  its  way 
to  the  ocean  through  subterranean  channels.  This  loss  is  independent  of 
the  season  of  the  year,  being  as  great  in  winter  as  in  summer,  and  in  some 
streams  takes  the  entire  flow  except  in  the  times  of  the 

HEAVIEST  FKESHETS. 

Another  loss  of  flow  ensues  after  this  belt  of  percolation  is  passed,  through 
evaporation,  which  is  very  large  during  the  dry  season,  and  between  both 
these  losses  it  is  safe  to  say  that  not  ovc  r  one-half  of  the  water  in  the  streams 
when  they  come  into  the  valley,  reaches  the  main  navigable  river  channels 
during  that  portion  of  the  year  between  May  1st  and  January  1st.  This,  too, 
is  their  only  source  of  supply  under  conditions  of  no  irrigation,  as  the  drain- 
age from  the  arid  plains  whose  only  water  supply  is  from  a  light  rainfall,  is 
practically  nothing.  Consider  now  the  results  of  the  most  effective  and  com- 
plete irrigation  in  this  same  section  of  country.  The  water  of  the  streams  is 
diverted  where  they  leave  the  hills,  into  ditches  and  canals  from  which  direct 
percolation  and  evaporation  are  at  a  minimum,  and  distributed  over  the  sur- 
face through  smaller  channels.  A  comparatively  small  portion  of  the  water 
is  lost  by  percolation  into  the  porous  belt  at  the  edge  of  the  foot-hills,  and 
the  flow  can  practically  be  considered  as  divided  into  three  portions,  the 
relatfve  ratio  of  which  is  inconsequential,  the  first  is  evaporated  directly 
from  the  surface,  the  second  supplies  the  needs  of  vegetation,  and  the  third 
remains  in  the  soil  above  the  impervious  strata  referred  to  till  what  is 
termed  the  point  of  saturation  is  reached  when  this  third  portion  drains  into 
the  main  river  channel.  This  third  portion  and  its  effects  are  of  very  great 
importance,  and  should  not  be  overlooked  in  considering  the  problem  of 
irrigation.  In  Kern  county  under  the  line  of,  and  several  miles  distant  from 
what  is  known  as  the  Galloway  canal  in  the  formerly 

ARID  PLAINS, 

Where  it  was  necessary  to  sink  wells  from  eighty  to  one  hundred  feet  to  get 
water,  it  is  now  obtainable  at  depths  from  ten  to  twenty-five  feet.  Alfalfa 
once  well  rooted  can  be  grown  under  these  conditions  without  direct  irrigation. 
In  Fresno  county  a  like  condition  is  observable,  water  is  found  at  twenty  feet 
where  it  was  necessary  to  dig  one  hundred  formerly,  and  in  some  localities  so 
saturated  has  the  soil  become  as  to  almost  convert  the  barren  desert  into  a 
Bwamp,  tules  growing  on  the  uplands.  This  saturation  is  not  dependent  on  a 
continuous  flow  of  water  in  the  irrigation  canals,  as  it  will  continue  during  the 
months  of  the  dry  season  in  which  there  is  no  water  in  these  channels.  The 
drainage  from  these  saturated  soils  directly  into  the  main  river  channels  has 
already  been  referred  to.  This  in  positive  benefit  to  the  navigability  of  the 
rivers  is  much  more  than  the  equivalent  of  the  water  withdrawn  from  the 
tributaries,  even  if  the  quantity  thus  returned  is  not  fully  equal  or  in  excess. 
The  water  is  diverted  from  the  tributaries  in  the  season  of  the  year  when  most 
loaded  with  sediment,  and  when  it  takes  only  a  surplus  flow  from  the  main 
rivers;  it  returns  cleared  of  sediment,  and  during  that  part  of  the  year  when 
the  rivers  are  at  the 


79 


LOW    WATER  STAGES. 

Another  practical  point  has  also  been  determined  that  should  have  some 
effect  at  least  in  determining  the  sincerity  of  the  existing  opposition  to  irri- 
gation, namely,  that  the  natural  average  of  the  dry  season  flow  of  any  of  the 
tributary  streams  in  the  lower  reaches  of  their  channels  can  be  diverted  far 
above  and  delivered  at  the  highest  point  of  the  riparian  lands  of  these  lower 
channels,  the  water  that  would  be  lost  in  the  natural  flow  of  the  streams  be- 
tween the  hills  and  the  aforesaid  lower  portion  of  their  channels,  serving  to 
irrigate  and  render  fruitful  the  uplands.  Can  any  riparianist  claiming  dam- 
age on  account  of  the  taking  away  of  water  from  his  land,  honestly  assert 
that  the  same  water  is  more  valuable  to  him  at  the  lowest  point  of  his  land 
than  at  the  highest? 


Fresno  Expositor. 

Fail  Not  At  Your  Peril, 

Information  reaches  ua  that  the  riparianists  have  opened  their  batteries 
with  full  force  against  irrigation  legislation.  Emissaries  of  the  land  and 
water  grabbers  are  at  Sacramento  doing  their  best  to  obstruct  legislation  on 
this  important  subject,  and  are  continually  endeavoring  to  burlesque  the 
efforts  of  the  Irrigation  Committee.  Mercenary  newspapers  have  also  been 
secured  to  devote  their  efforts  to  deride  the  great  issue  of  Southern  California. 
The  friends  of  irrigation  must,  therefore,  be  on  the  alert.  They  must  write 
and  battle  for  the  common  good  of  the  people.  It  is  true  that  the  demands 
of  the  irrigators  are  so  square,  honest,  necessary  and  just,  that  the  Legislature 
ought  not  to  hesitate  a  moment  about  the  matter,  but  pass  the  necessary  laws 
without  delay.  The  sentiment  throughout  Southern  California  in  favor  of 
just  irrigation  laws  is  too  strong,  too  united  and  too  determined  to  be  misun- 
derstood by  the  Solons  at  Sacramento.  They  want  laws  that  will  enable  them 
to  divert  the  waters  of  the  various  streams  for  irrigation,  and  which  will  pro- 
tect them  in  the  enjoyment  of  these  rights.  Certainly  the  representatives 
of  the  people  are  not  going  to  lay  back  and  say  that  they  cannot  do  anything 
for  the  fostering  of  this  great  interest,  nor  do  we  think  they  will  be  foolish 
enough  to  put  themselves  on  record  as  being  in  favor  of  letting  those  who 
chance  to  own  lands  along  a  stream  to  say  that  the  water  of  that  stream  must 
continue  to  flow  for  all  time  past  their  lands,  undiminished  in  quantity  and 
undisturbed  in  quality.  This  is  the  English  riparian  law,  which  the  Supreme 
Court  has  recently  decided,  applies  to  this  State.  We  call  upon  the  Legisla- 
ture to  be  true  to  the  people,  and  to  work  for  the  best  interests  of  their  State. 
Pass  the  irrigation  laws  suggested  by  the  committee,  and  thus  restore  confi- 
dence throughout  Southern  California.  If  you  would  aid  the  prosperity  of 
your  State,  do  not  hesitate — act  promptly  and  earnestly  in  behalf  of  the 
irrigators.  It  is  the  paramount  issue  of  the  southern  half  of  the  State — all 
other  matters  pale  into  insignificance  when  compared  with  this  great  ques- 
tion. Gentlemen  of  the  Legislature,  falter  not  in  your  duty  in  this  matter, 
6 


80 


Colusa  Maxwell  Star. 

A  Prosperous  Country, 

Our  trip  to  Fresno  as  a  delegate  to  the  State  Irrigation  Convention,  was- 
attended  by  scenes  and  incidents  well  calculated  to  inspire  new  courage  in  the 
fight  which  we  have  made  from  the  beginning,  namely:  For  the  overthrow 
of  old  ideas,  usages  and  customs,  and  place  in  their  stead  the  progressive 
system,  of  which  irrigation  is  at  the  basis,  and  which  has  become  a  rule  of 
the  great  local  commonwealth  of  Southern  California.  The  trip  was  one  of 
which  it  may  be  truly  said  one  passes  from  an  old  civilization  into  the  new — 
from  a  dull,  languid  monotony  into  thriving,  prosperous,  and  happy  com- 
munities. Prosperity,  as  it  always  does,  has  drawn  from  other  and  less 
profitable  fields,  talent,  capital,  and  energy.  Indeed,  the  array  of  local  taU 
ent  which  found  expression  in  the  Convention  is  as  brilliant  as  may  be  found 
in  the  councils  of  the  State. 

The  social  conditions  of  that  section  are  healthy,  while  the  physical,  in  all 
respects,  are  of  the  most  perfect  order.  The  products  find  a  ready  market  at 
figures  always  ranging  far  above  the  cost  of  production.  Great  wineries  have 
sprung  up  which  send  out  hundreds  of  thousands  of  gallons  of  wine  annu- 
ally, while  thousands  of  tons  of  grapes  and  raisins  are  put  on  the  market  every 
fall.  Here,  too,  we  find  the  home  of  the  wealthy.  Oakland  has  no  attrac- 
tions for  the  wealthy  citizen  of  Fresno.  The  extraordinary  healthfulness  of 
that  section  is  a  stern  rebuke  to  those  of  this  section  who  oppose  irrigation 
on  the  grounds  of  it  being  the  cause  of  malaria  or  sickness.  We  have  always 
looked  upon  that  theory  as  absurd,  but  now,  we  brand  it  as  the  theory  of 
those  who  never  search  for  causes.  If  it  is  true  that  irrigation  produces 
malaria,  then  every  section  where  irrigation  prevails  is  malarious.  In  the 
southern  counties,  in  a  warm  climate,  where  irrigation  is  universal,  we  find 
the  general  health  of  the  people  is  much  better  than  on  the  dry  Colusa 
plains.    Hence,  the  theory  is  groundless. 

But  there  is  an  important  feature  of  irrigation  to  which  we  wish  to  call 
attention,  and  that  is  that  the  surface  water  in  the  irrigation  districts  of 
Fresno  has,  in  some  places,  raised  to  the  surface,  and  as  unreasonable  as  it 
may  seem,  in  places  where  prior  to  irrigation  it  was  twenty  feet  to  surface 
water,  now  a  system  of  drainage  is  becoming  necessary.  It  is  a  demon- 
strated fact  that  each  year  less  water  is  required  for  irrigation  purposes,  a 
fact  that  figures  largely  in  the  size  of  the  proposed  canal  through  this  coun- 
try, necessary  to  irrigate  our  lands  for  all  time.  We  believe  that  a  much 
smaller  canal  than  has  been  proposed  would  furnish  all  the  water  that  will  be 
required. 

In  conclusion,  we  tender  our  thanks  to  the  citizens  of  Fresno  for  the  very 
warm  reception  and  kind  treatment  which  we  received  at  their  hands.  A 
more  public-spirited,  courteous  and  open-handed  people  we  have  never  met, 
and  we  tender  our  congratulations  to  them  on  their  good  fortune  of  being 
citizens  of  a  county  that  is  among  the  most  progressive  in  the  State. 


81 


Resources  of  California. 

Few  understand  clearly  the  necessary  result  of  the  application  of  the 
English  doctrine  of  riparian  ownership.  It  is,  that  no  person,  not  even 
a  riparian  owner,  can  remove  one  drop  of  the  water  of  a  stream /or  irrigfa- 
iion.  The  common  law  did  not  sanction  irrigation — nothing  but  domestic 
use.  It  follows  that  all  water  must  run  to  waste,  under  this  law.  When  a 
man  advocates  riparianism,  he  advocates  the  absolute  non-use  of  water  for 
irrigation*. 

If  it  should  come  to  pass  that  this  pernicious  and  fatal  principle  shall  come 
to  be  enforced  in  this  State  to  its  full  extent,  the  voice  of  the  people  will  be 
heard  at  the  doors  of  this  Capitol  in  tones  of  stern  command.  They  will  deny 
to  the  tribunals  which  they  have  constituted  the  power  to  maim  or  destroy 
their  resources.  They  will  crush  the  accursed  doctrine,  and  with  it  those  who 
stand  under  it. 

But  we  believe  that  the  intelligence  and  honesty  of  this  legislature  will 
repudiate  every  principle  of  the  English  common  law  which  conflicts  with  the 
right  of  appropriation.  If  the  water  is  to  be  utilized  for  irrigation,  there  is  no 
reason  for  hesitation  in  determining  by  whom.  By  the  owner  of  the  banks 
of  the  stream?  Why?  What  has  he  done,  that  he  should  have  it?  Let  jus- 
tice be  done  to  the  appropriator.  To  quote  from  Justice  Field's  decision  in  a 
leading  water  case,  in  which  the  riparian  doctrine  is  rejected  and  the  right  of 
appropriation  maintained:  "He  who  first  connects  his  own  labor  with  prop- 
erty thus  situated  and  open  to  general  exploration  does,  in  natural  justice, 
acquire  a  better  right  to  its  use  and  enjoyment  than  others  who  have  not  given 
such  labor." 

Who  are  the  riparianists  who  are  raising  the  hue  and  cry  of  "stop  thief" 
through  their  organ  at  Sacramento?  So  far  as  heard  from,  although  they  are 
making  themselves  very  active,  the  roll-call  of  their  noble  army  carries  but 
two  names,  one  from  Tulare  and  one  from  Kern,  both  of  which  have  been 
represented  before  the  irrigation  committees  by  attorneys.  A  distinction 
must  be  made  between  the  terms  "riparianist  "  and  "riparian  owner."  An 
* '  riparian  owner ' '  may  be  defined  as  one  who  owns  land  by  or  through 
which  flows  a  natural  stream  or  water-course.  A  "  riparianist  "  is  one  who 
wishes  to  make  it  the  law  of  the  land  that  a  riparian  owner  is  entitled  to  the 
undiminished  flow  of  the  water-course  by  or  through  his  land — as  under  the 
common  law  of  England.  There  are  several  riparianists  who  are  not  riparian 
owners.  There  are  two  riparian  owners  who  are  not  riparianists.  Hundreds 
of  riparian  owners,  farming  by  irrigation,  obtain  their  water  by  virtue  of  the 
laws  authorizing  its  appropriation.  They  are  in  favor  of  recognizing  the 
validity  of  those  laws,  because,  being  now  satisfied  with  the  rights  acquired 
by  their  appropriations,  they  believe,  and  truly,  too,  that  under  the  common 
law  theory,  the  privilege  of  taking  water  for  irrigation  will  be  lost  to  them. 

There  is  not  a  riparian  owner  who  irrigates  south  of  Lathrop  who  is  not 
an  appropriator.  Many  of  them  are  actually  represented  by  the  committee 
from  the  Fresno  and  Riverside  Irrigation  Conventions,  and  all  are  anti- 
riparianists. 


82 


They  set  a  much  greater  valuation  upon  their  vested  rights  as  appropria- 
tors  than  as  riparian  owners. 

The  riparianists  beseech  the  Legislature  to  "  go  slow "  on  the  irrigation 
question. 

This  recalls  Joe  Jeflferson's  Jiip  Van  Winkle.  While  under  the  encouraging 
influence  ot  "  Schnapps,"  Hip  was  asked  what  he  would  do  if  Mrs.  Van  Win- 
kle were  drowning,  and  should  cry  out  to  him,  "  Come  and  save  me,  Eip!" 
To  which  he  replied,  "If  Mrs.  Van  Winkle  were  drowning,  and  she  said  to 
me,  'Rip,  come  and  save  me!'  I  would  say  to  her,  'Mrs.  Van  Winkle,  I  will 
yust  go  home  and  tink  about  dat.'  " 

The  people  from  Stockton  to  San  Diego  are  crying  to  this  Legislature  to 
save  them  from  riparianism. 

Will  the  Legislature  "  go  home  and  tink  about  it?" 

It  is  well  to  consider  well  before  legislating,  but  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  this 
will  be  done  before  going  home. 


San  Francisco  Call. 

Passed  the  Assembly. 

The  Assembly  has  passed  bill  No.  171,  repealing  the  common  law  of  Eng- 
land in  as  far  as  it  guarantees  riparian  owners  any  rights  in  this  State,  and 
bill  No.  170,  providing  for  the  diversion  of  water  and  the  adjudication  of 
water  rights.  If  the  Senate  passes  these  bills  the  problem  of  irrigation  will 
be  placed  before  the  people  for  practical  solution.  The  Legislative  Committee 
on  Irrigation,  to  whose  steady  and  intelligent  work  the  passage  of  the  bills 
in  the  Assembly  is  largely  due,  does  not  claim  to  have  devised  a  perfect  sys- 
tem of  irrigation.  They  have  presented  the  system  which  seems  the  best, 
and  which  may  be  perfected  as  practical  use  exposes  imperfections.  Of  the 
ultimate  success  of  these  measures  there  can  be  no  doubt.  The  question  is 
whether  the  present  Legislature  will  act  or  whether  it  will  throw  the  decis- 
ion into  the  next  State  campaign.  The  Republicans  and  Democrats  are 
evenly  divided  in  the  Senate,  but  as  yet  the  issue  has  not  become  partisan. 
If  either  party  in  the  Senate  throws  its  weight  against  irrigation  it  will  be 
held  in  the  next  campaign  as  having  taken  that  side  of  the  question.  The 
Legislative  Irrigation  Committee  states  that  the  cost  of  irrigation  work  now 
constructed  and  in  progress  of  construction  is  not  less  than  $100,000,000. 
The  figures  seem  extravagant;  but  the  works  now  approaching  availability 
will,  no  doubt,  furnish  means  of  irrigation  for  many  hundred  thousand  acres, 
and  it  is  estimated  that  the  water  in  one  river,  economically  distributed,  will 
suffice  to  extend  irrigation  to  millions  of  acres  as  yet  untouched.  Next  to 
the  prohibition  of  Chinese  immigration,  this  is  the  dominant  issue  in  this 
State.  The  Senate  may  put  the  work  off  two  years,  but  in  the  end  a  measure 
of  such  vital  necessity  will  be  carried. 


83 
San  Francisco  Post. 

Act  at  Once. 

It  is  understood  that  Senator  McClure  disclaims  the  paternity  of  the  Irri- 
gation Commission  bill,  the  object  of  which  is  to  postpone  action  upon  irri- 
gation for  two  years  longer,  and  that  he  is  a  warm  advocate  of  the  bills 
already  passed  the  Assembly.  In  this  coarse  he  is  joined  by  other  Republi- 
can Senators.  This  is  an  emphatic  contradiction  of  the  absurd  assertion 
wKJch  has  been  made  that  Republicans  are  making  a  party  fight  against 
irrigation. 

The  destruction  to  speedy  passage  of  these'  measures  comes  mainly  from 
Democratic  Senators,  led  by  Cox,  Cross  and  Spencer  of  Napa.  It  is  simply 
a  criminal  disregard  of  the  public  good  for  any  Senator  to  prevent  a  vote  on 
these  bills,  even  though  he  may  be  in  good  faith,  opposed  to  their  passage. 
To  press  the  Commission  bill  will  involve  the  defeat  of  the  Fresno  bills. 
The  member  who  shall  obstruct  their  immediate  consideration  and  passage, 
upon  the  ground  that  further  investigation  is  necessary,  will  sooner  or  later 
find  himself  cast  into  a  political  purgatory,  where,  apart  from  the  din  and 
turmoil  of  contending  parties,  he  may  occupy  his  leisure  with  the  study  of 
irrigation.  This  week  must  not  pass  without  such  action  as  will  make  the 
final  passage  of  the  bill  before  adjournment  a  certainty.  Take  them  up  to- 
morrow, and  every  succeeding  day,  until  all  are  read  a  third  time  and  passed. 
Their  importance  outweighs  all  other  proposed  legislation.  Imperative  duty 
to  the  people  forbids  another  moment  of  delay. 


The  Colusa  Sun. 

Irrij^ation. 

It  is  but  fair  to  say  that  the  -Sun,  insists  that  the  Sacramento  River  is  in 
no  danger  from  any  possible  diversion  of  water  for  irrigation. — Sac.  Bee. 

Yes,  that  is  just  what  we  do  say — that  the  Sacramento  River  is  not  in 
danger  in  the  least  from  the  passage  of  the  Irrigation  bill.  The  fact  is,  there 
are  only  two  or  three  times  during  a  winter  that  water  cati  be  taken  out  of 
the  river  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  and  then  only  when  the  river  is  bank 
full.  We  do  say  that  if  every  drop  of  water  in  the  river  could  be  used  on  the 
soil  of  this  great  valley  for  agricultural,  horticultural  and  vinicultural  pur- 
poses, the  State  would  be  the  richer  for  it.  We  are  not  fighting  Sacramento 
City,  the  Hog's  Back,  nor  any  interest  of  vital  moment  to  the  welfare  of  the 
people,  but  we  do  want  to  see  the  thousands  of  poor  men,  who  have  small 
farms,  but  no  water,  have  a  chance  to  use  the  very  element  that  makes  soil 
productive.     The  Bee  also  says: 

The  question  of  drainage,  we  take  it,  must  be,  for  all  time  to  come,  of 
even    more  importance  to  this  valley  than  navigation. 

The  italics  are  ours.  We  say  irrigation  is  more  important  than  naviga- 
tion; you  say — drainage.  Think  of  the  difference.  Irrigation  means  pro- 
ductiveness, wealth,  happy  homes,  support  of  Sacramento,  San  Francisco, 


84 


and  a  prosperous  civilization.  Drainage  means — please  tell  us?  For  the 
life  of  us  we  cannot  see  the  logic  of  j'our  reasoning. 

Say  this  river  is  worth,  annually,  two  million  dollars  to  the  counties 
through  which  it  flows,  what  would  it  be  worth  were  its  waters  used  freely 
in  every  part  of  these  counties  where  it  is  needed?  Two  millions?  Three 
times  that  much,  and  no  paper  knows  that  better  than  the  Bee.  But  all  the 
water  needed  for  irrigation  purposes  can  be  obtained  at  a  time  or  times  when 
navigation  is  not  affected  in  the  least  by  it. 

We  have  great  respect  lor  vested  rights,  prescriptive  rights,  etc.,  but  when 
we  see  vast  districts  of  rich  soil  valueless  because  of  a  lack  of  moisture,  then 
we  go  for  a  change. 

Sacramento  Bee. 

The  Doctrine  of  Riparian  Rigfhts. 

Sacramento,  Feb.  7,  1885. 
Editors  Bee — Last  night  I  was  before  the  Senate  Committee  on  Irrigation, 
and  I  was  surprised  to  find  men  in  attendance  there  who  were  opposed  to 
the  diversion  of  water  from  streams  for  irrigating  or  any  other  purpose,  in- 
sisting on  riparian  rights,  as  defined  in  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
simply,  I  suppose,  because  they  happen  to  have  a  bit  of  land  upon  the  mar- 
gin of  some  stream.  It  does  seem  strange  that  a  man  could  be  so  selfish* 
and  have  so  little  public  spirit.  Let  us  look  at  the  practical  working  of  said 
decision,  to-wit,  that  the  water  must  run  in  its  natural  channel  through  (or 
alongside  of)  plaintiff's  land — undiminished.  According  to  that  decision,  no 
one  has  even  riparian  rights  except  the  last  man  on  the  stream.  That  man, 
though  he  might  own  but  40  acres,  could  cause  hundreds  of  families  and 
millions  of  acres  to  suffer,  while  he,  like  the  dog  in  the  manger,  could  not 
use  the  water,  nor  would  allow  any  one  else  to  do  so  without  buying  the 
right  of  him  at  whatever  he  might  choose  to  assess.  VVith  this  state  of 
affairs,  large  communities,  large  interests,  even  the  districts  of  large  cities, 
would  be  in  the  hands  of  and  completely  at  the  mercy  of  one  contrary  or 
mercenary  individual.  I  do  hope  that  the  Legislature  will  wipe  out  this 
horrid  doctrine  by  the  enactment  of  good  laws  for  the  equal  distribution  of 
the  waters  of  the  State  among  the  citizens  of  the  State.  W. 


Stockton  Daily  Independent. 

Angry  Irrinfators— Bogus  Petition  Agfainst  Passingf  Irrigfation  Bills. 

Mebced,  February  21. — A  letter  from  Senator  Spencer  was  received  to- 
night by  W.  L.  Ashe,  in  which  the  writer  states  that  a  petition  has  been  re- 
ceived by  Assemblyman  Goucher,  from  Merced,  the  signers  thereof  request- 
ing that  the  irrigation  bill  now  pending  in  the  Assembly  be  opposed.  The 
news  of  the  existence  of  such  a  petition  created  quite  a  commotion  among 
the  citizens,  to  whom  it  was  a  genuine  surprise.     No  one  can  be  found  who 


85 


knows  anything  concerning  it.  Handbills  have  been  posted,  calling  a  mass 
meeting  to  be  held  at  ten  o'clock  Monday,  to  frame  resolutions  and  a  coun- 
ter-petition. The  sentiment  among  all  classes  is  strongly  tending  to  promote 
the  interests  of  the  irrigators. 

THE   CULPEITS  FOUND. 

Mebced,  Fe*bruary  21. — Since  writing  the  above  a  number  who  signed  the 
anti-irrigation  petition  have  been  seen  and  several  stated  that  they  did  not 
understand  the  motive  of  the  document.  None,  so  far  as  known,  are  prop- 
erty-holders. 

Examiner. 

The  Irrig'ation  Measures. 

The  snap  of  the  party  whip  by  the  Republican  State  Central  Committee  is 
not  as  effective  as  was  anticipated,  against  the  Fresno  irrigation  measures. 
There  are  Republican  Senators  who  will  refuse  to  submit  tamely  to  the  or- 
ders issued  from  Republican  headquarters  commanding  them  to  sacrifice  the 
people's  welfare.  Even  so  strict  a  party  man  as  Senator  McClure,  generally- 
holding  himself  amenable  to  party  discipline,  will  not,  it;  is  said,  forego  his 
views  in  favor  of  the  prompt  adoption  of  the  Fresno  Convention  bills,  even 
at  the  mandate  of  the  governing  organization.  Such  independence,  for  the 
common  good,  is  worthy  of  praise.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  untimely  at- 
tempt to  make  a  party  fight  against  these  bills  will  be  resented  by  other  Sen- 
ators with  no  less  independence  and  good  judgment.  There  is  nothing  in 
any  of  the  bills  to  make  a  party  question  of,  nor  is  there  anything  in  them 
which  a  man  of  sound  judgment  can  refuse  to  support.  Should  the  proposed 
measures  become  laws,  running  water  will  hereafter  be  devoted  to  irrigation, 
and  any  one  whose  property  is  taken  or  injured  will  be  indemnified.  The 
wisely  extended  and  strong  public  feeling  in  favor  of  these  bills  arises,  not 
from  the  unreasonable  and  selfish  demand  of  a  fraction  of  the  community, 
but  from  a  universal  belief,  pervading  all  classes  and  all  sections,  that  they 
form  the  best  and  only  relief  from  the  present  deplorable  condition  of  the 
State  water  system.  If  the  Republican  policy  shall  induce  any  Senator  to 
antagonize  this  legislation,  he  will  soon  learn  that  opposition  to  the  wish  of  a 
whole  people  is  destructive  of  political  life,  and  that  in  some  cases  obedience 
to  party  dictation  is  not  encouraging  to  political  ambition. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Irrigfation. 

The  Assembly  has  been  spurred  to  do  its  duty  on  the  irrigation  matter, 
and  the  whole  series  of  Fresno  bills — the  useful  ones  as  well  as  the  orna- 
mental— have  been  passed  by  overwhelming  votes.  '  They  now  go  to  the  Sen- 
ate, where  they  should  consume   little  time,  as  the  subject  has  been  fully 


86 


discussed  and  every  member  is  or  should  be  prepared  to  vote.  The  time  is 
short,  but  its  is  enough  if  Senators  will  curb  their  propensity  to  break  out  in 
oratory.  There  is  no  call  for  speecbmaking.  Nobody  hears  Senatorial  ora- 
tions; nobody  wants  to  hear  them.  What  is  wanted  is  action — prompt,  clear 
and  decisive. 

If  the  Senate  does  its  duty,  the  entire  set  of  Fresno  bills  can  be  passed  before 
next  Wednesday,  and  a  practical  start  may  be  had  in  the  business  of  supply- 
ing water  to  the  southern  counties  before  April  1st.  Some  of  the  bills  are  not 
perhaps  all  that  every  one  could  wish.  Objections  carrying  some  weight 
may  be  urged  to  several  of  their  provisions.  But  they  are,  on  the  whole, 
good  bills,  framed  in  the  right  direction,  and  calculated  to  accomplish  a  use- 
ful purpose.  Their  defects  will  be  better  discerned  after  they  have  been 
tried  in  practice  than  they  can  be  now.  Two  years'  experience  of  irrigation 
under  State  laws  will  suggest  a  number  of  desirable  amendments  which  can 
be  passed  at  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature  in  1887.  But  in  the  mean- 
time, people  who  want  water  will  get  it,  and  irrigators  will  adjust  their  neces- 
sities and  their  action  to  the  laws,  such  as  ihey  are. 

It  is  beyond  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  interpret  laws,  and  the  de- 
cision of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  case  of  Miller  vs.  Haggin  will,  so  long  as 
it  is  undisturbed,  prove  somewhat  of  a  stumbling-block  to  irrigators  who  are 
contending  against  the  acquired  rights  of  riparian  owners.  But  it  is  not 
unreasonable  to  expect  that  the  almost  unanimous  expression  of  public  opin- 
ion which  has  been  called  out  by  the  discussion  in  the  Legislature  will  have 
its  effect  on  the  minds  of  the  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  that,  on  the 
rehearing,  the  practical  inconveniences  resulting  from  the  late  decision  may 
present  themselves  in  so  strong  a  light  that  it  may  be  reversed. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

If  the  statesmen  in  the  State  Senate  who  aspire  to  higher  honors,  expect  to 
get  any  votes  in  Southern  California  two  years  hence,  they  had  better  give 
their  hearty  influence  and  support  to  the  irrigation  measures  now  pending 
before  the  Legislature.  Irrigation  will  be  the  politics  of  the  southern 
counties  two  years  hence,  and  fealty  to  the  cause  will  be  the  leading  point 
by  which  they  will  be  gauged.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  riparian  rights  ^in 
California,  as  defined  by  the  English  common  law,  and  the  Legislature 
should  hasten  to  declare  the  fact. 


Kern  County  Galifornian- 

Irrlfiration  Bills. 

A  large  portion  of  our  space  is  this  week  devoted  to  the  irrigation  bills 
now  before  the  Legislature.  These  do  not  constitute  all  the  bills  now  before 
that  body.  Several  others  have  been  introduced,  but  they  are  not  important 
and  are  not  likely,  in  the  stages  to  which  they  have  advanced,  to  come  up 


87 


for  consideration  so  late  in  the  session.  We  did  not  publish  these  bills  be- 
fore because,  until  now,  they  had  not  reached  a  stage  of  perfection  satis- 
factory to  the  authors  and  promoters.  It  is  unlikely  that  any  of  them,  ex- 
cept the  first,  will  meet  with  farther  amendment,  and  if  they  become  laws, 
it  is  altogether  probable  that  it  will  be  without  change.  The  first  in  order, 
consisting  of  amendments  to  the  Code,  needs  no  explanation.  It  is  designed 
to  complete  the  title  devoted  to  water  rights  in  the  spirit  which  pervades  it 
down  to  the  last  incongruous  section  for  which  one  is  substituted  designed 
to  meet  the  wants  and  necessities  of  this  State  rather  than  those  of  Alaska, 
where  floods  of  rain  or  heavy  falls  of  snow  are  characteristic  of  the  seasons 
at  all  times.  It  is  self-explanatory,  and  requires  no  comment.  Following  is 
one  providing  for  establishing  and  adjudicating  water  claims,  so  that  the 
rights  of  all  appropriators  of  water  may  be  definitely  determined  and  made 
matter  of  record  and  appurtenant  to  the  land,  giving  to  them  positive  value. 
The  next  is  a  bill  providing  for  the  formation  of  water  and  irrigation  dis- 
tricts, in  order  that  the  distribution  and  use  of  water  may  be  regulated  on  a 
basis  of  justice,  and  its  waste  prevented.  The  last  in  order  is  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution,  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  capital  invested  in 
irrigation  works,  and  for  the  purpose  of  encouraging  its  further  investment 
in  reclaiming  the  waste  places  of  the  State.  Should  the  proposed  amend- 
ment be  adopted,  we  are  assured  thf.t  the  requisite  capital  would  be  at  once 
forthcoming,  to  reclaim  what  is  known  as  the  "weed  patch  "  in  this  county,, 
by  the  construction  of  reservoirs  in  the  mountains  and  the  conveyance  of 
the  water,  to  the  points  where  needed,  by  means  that  would  prevent  absorp- 
tion and  waste.  And  this  great  enterprise  would  be  only  one  of  many  that 
would  be  at  once  inaugurated  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State. 


Los  Angeles  Daily  Herald. 

The  tactics  resorted  to  by  obstructionists  in  the  Assemby  for  the  purpose 
of  staving  off  action  on  the  Irrigation  Bill,  though  persistent,  serve  only  to 
make  the  friends  of  the  cause  more  in  earnest  than  ever.  Some  of  the  ob- 
structors clutch  at  very  fragile  straws.  One  ingenious  gentleman,  when  at 
length  the  previous  question  was  moved,  for  the  purpose  of  putting  an  end 
to  the  farcial  amendments  offered  by  the  opposition,  rose  to  remark  that 
he  had  nothing  to  say  on  the  motion,  and  was  reminded  promptly  by  the 
Speaker  that  he  could  not  say  anything,  being  out  of  order:  the  question 
was  put.  It  is  not  probable  that  the  passage  of  the  bill  can  now  be  pre- 
vented by  the  kind  of  tactics  mentioned.  Should  the  bill  become  a  law,  as 
there  is  now  every  reason  to  hope  and  believe,  our  people  will  have  cause  to 
be  grateful  to  the  gentlemen  who  composed  the  Fresno  Convention  and  to 
those  now  aiding  in  the  passage  of  the  bill. 


88 
Colusa  Maxwell  Star. 

We  have  been  at  some  expense  and  trouble  to  find  out  whether  or  not  Cali- 
jfornia  is  in  need  of  irrigation  laws,  and  have  contributed  our  mite  to  the 
end  that  needed  legislation  may  be  had  at  the  present  session  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. At  present  we  are  without  laws  (granting  the  right  to  appropriate  water 
from  running  streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation,  and  hence  those  sections 
that  have  availed  themselves  of  the  use  of  water  for  this  purpose,  and  are 
wholly  dependent  upon  irrigation  for  sustenance  are  without  legal  protec- 
tion to  rights  to  which  the  god  of  nature  entitles  them.  Irrigation  will 
sooner  or  later  be  demanded  by  the  great  agricultural  interests  of  the  State, 
and  sooner  or  later  they  must  and  will  have  laws  that  will  forever  settle  the 
question  as  to  the  free  use  of  running  water  for  that  purpose.  The  enact- 
ment of  necessary  laws  by  the  present  Legislature  will  save  our  southern 
brethren  much  annoyance,  litigation,  and  possibly  violence. 


Fresno  Republican. 

The  Sacramento  Capital  says  truly  that  the  fight  against  irrigation  laws  is 
the  sajne  old  opposition  that  was  made  to  the  "No  Fence  Laws"  some  years 
ago.  f  It  is  a  struggle  on  the  part  of  cattJe  kings  and  land  monopolists  of 
Southern  California  to  retain  their  grasp  upon  vast  bodies  of  public  domain, 
and  at  the  same  time  hold  a  monopoly  of  all  the  waters  of  the  natural  streams. 
Most  of  these  cattle  kings  acquired  their  vast  tracts  by  open  and  notorious 
fraud,  and  with  their  ill-gotten  gains  they  are  now  corrupting  the  law-making 
power  and  blocking  the  wheels  of  progress  in  the  State^ 

The  long  delay  in  commencing  active  work  on  the  irrigation  question  in 
the  Legislature  endangers  the  passage  of  the  bills  on  account  of  the  lack  of 
time.  It  is  hoped  the  members  of  the  Legislature  have  given  this  question 
the  consideration  which  will  enable  them  to  act  promptly  upon  it,  for  with- 
out prompt  action  the  fight  for  irrigation  is  lost,  and  another  two  years  of 
darkness  and  uncertainty  must  be  gone  through  with  by  the  farmers  and  hor- 
ticulturists of  Southern  Cali-fornia.  It  is  this  feeling  of  uncertainty  that  is 
now  holding  in  check  the  increase  in  population  necessary  to  the  prosperity 
and  advancement  of  the  State.  This  Legislature  has  not  yet  done  anything 
that  is  calculated  to  merit  the  grateful  remembrance  of  the  people,  and  if  it 
now  fails  to  do  its  plain  duty  in  a  declaration  of  the  right  of  the  people  to  use 
the  surplus  water  of  flowing  streams,  and  the  adoption  of  laws  to  regulate 
such  use,  it  will  pass  into  history  as  one  of  the  most  useless  of  all  California 
Legislatures,  and  that  is  about  the  worst  thing  that  could  be  said  of  it. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

The  Itegrislature  and  Irrigation. 

The  great  struggle  between  the  cattle  kings  and  the  people  is  still  going  on 
at  Sacramento.  In  the  Assembly  the  appropriators  appear  to  have  matters 
*heir  own  way.    This  is  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Assembly  more  prop- 


89 


erly  represents  the  people,  coming  as  it  does  from  them;  but  in  the  Senate  the 
lines  are  more  closely  drawn,  and  the  passage  of  suitable  irrigation  laws  a 
matter  of  extreme  difficulty.  Since  the  adoption  of  the  new  Constitution  the 
Senate  has  failed  to  meet  the  wishes  of  the  people,  and  in  a  large  measure  has 
ceased  to  be  a  representative  body.  There  are  too  many  men  in  it  who  aspire 
to  be  statesmen,  and  too  many  who  have  not  the  brains  to  reach  that  lofty 
attitude.  Still  there  are  in  that  body  a  majority  of  good  men  and  true,  and  if 
they  can  be  brought  to  study  the  question  of  irrigation  and  wants  of  the  peo- 
ple there  is  no  question  but  what  that  all  the  irrigation  measures  proposed  by 
the  irrigators  will  become  laws.  But  the  trouble  is  that  the  subject  is  new  to 
m*ny  of  them,  and  in  the  hurry  of  a  sixty-days  session  they  have  but  little 
time  to  spare  to  study  new  measures.  Reddy  is  working  manfully  for  the 
irrigators,  and  he  is  ably  seconded  by  Del  Valle,  of  Los  Angeles.  "Whitney, 
of  Alameda,  is  with  the  irrigators  in  feeling;  McClure  knows  the  necessity' of 
enacting  laws  on  the  subject  and  will  vote  with  the  people  to  repeal  the  obnox- 
ious section  of  the  Code  pertaining  to  riparian  rights.  Cross,  of  Nevada,  ap- 
preciates our  wants,  and  is  in  hearty  sympathy  with  the  irrigators,  though  not 
exactly  agreeing  with  them  in  reference  to  all  their  measures.  There  is  room 
for  much  effective  work  in  the  Senate,  and  it  should  be  done  at  once,  as  the 
time  for  the  adjournment  of  the  Legislature  is  rapidly  approaching. 

The  irrigators  of  Southern  California  will  gratefully  remember  Assemblyman 
Munday,  of  Sonoma,  who  has  led  the  contest  in  the  House  on  their  part.  He 
has  championed  their  cause  with  marked  ability  and  with  great  zeal.  He  is  a 
brilliant  young  man,  and  will  make  his  mark  in  the  world.  Hon.  C.  F.  Mc- 
Glashan,  of  Nevada,  made  a  brilliant  speech  in  behalf  of  the  irrigators,  which 
showed  that  he  understood  the  situation,  and  was  with  the  people.  Hon. 
John  Yule,  of  Shasta,  Dr,  May,  of  San  Francisco,  Hon.  Mr.  Weaver,  of  Hum- 
boldt, Hon.  R.  P.  Ashe,  of  Kern,  have  done  us  noble  service  that  our  people 
will  remember,  should  opportunity  offer.  Of  course,  Assemblyman  Clark,  of 
our  own  county  must  not  be  forgotten.  He  has  worked  for  the  irrigators  un- 
ceasingly. 

The  Senate  spent  another  day  in  talking  about  the  irrigation  bills  yester- 
day. The  enemies  of  the  measure  propose  to  kill  them  by  talk.  It  was  a  bad 
mistake  when  the  bills  were  referred  to  a  Committee  of  the  Whole.  The 
friends  of  irrigation  should  see  that  the  bills  passed  by  the  Assembly  take  a 
different  course. 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Tlie  Live  Igaue— Voice  of  the  People  on  the  Irrigfation  Question— General 
Desire  Manifested  for  Leg^islation  Upon  the  Subject  of  Water  Distri- 
bution. 

To  ghow  intensely  the  people  of  various  sections  of  the  State  are  interested 
in  the  question  of  irrigation,  a  few  extracts  are  herewith  published  from  a 
number  of  letters  received  by  the  Examiner  during  the  past  few  days.  They 
-have  been  selected  at  random  as  samples,  and  clearly  indicate  how  important 


90 


the  subject  of  a  water  supply  for  irrigation  has  become  to  the  people  of  the 

State. 

In  San  Bernardino. 

Riverside,  (San  Bernardino  County),  Feb.  22,— The  principal  hope  of  the 
people  of  San  Bernardino,  is  the  supply  and  economical  distribution  of  our 
water  supply.  Heretofore  we  have  regarded  it  as  an  assured  fact  that  we 
could  control  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  our  lands.  This  idea  seems  to  have 
been  a  delusion,  since  the  advocates  of  riparian  rights  have  appeared  in  such 
force  in  our  State  Legislature.  Here,  where  the  first  State  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion was  held,  where  thousands  of  happy  homes  are  dependent  upon  irriga- 
tion, we  feel  vitally  interested  in  the  action  of  the  present  Legislature. 
Will  it  help  us?  We  hope  so;  but  we  are  in  fear  lest  we  shall  be  neglected. 
We  feel  grateful  to  the  Examiner  for  casting  its  influence  on  our  side,  and, 
wHile  I  am  not  a  Democrat,  and  never  was  or  expect  to  be,  I  repeat  that  the 
general  expression  here  in  Riverside  and  Redlauds  is  that  the  Examiner's 
friends  are  aiding  us.  Please  urge  the  question,  for  it  is  an  important  one  to 
us.  Our  reservoir  system  in  San  Bernardino  county  is  yet  in  its  infancy, 
but  it  will  grow.  The  waters  of  the  Santa  Ana  and  Lytle  creek  are  our  main 
resource.  What  we  want  is  legal  regulations  for  a  proper  distribution  of  the 
water.  I  have  written  to  our  Assemblyman  and  Senator  to  urge  the  irrigation 
question.  Yours  for  more  water,  W.  A.  S. 

A  Voice  From  Bntte. 

Oboville,  February  21. — Oroville  is  much  interested  in  the  solution  of 
the  irrigation  question  now  pending  in  the  Legislature.  The  Examiner,  I 
think,  has  taken  the  right  stand  in  this  dispute.  When  I  say  so,  I  know 
that  I  decide  against  mysjlf,  as  I  own  important  riparian  rights  in  Butte 
county,  but  I  cannot  use  the  water,  and  am  willing  that  it  should  be  made 
useful.  We  have  a  large  quantity  of  unoccupied  lands  in  Butte  county  which 
might  be  used  profitably  by  the  application  of  water.  This  is  a  splendid  fruit 
region,  and  with  the  settlement  of  the  riparian  rights  issue  we  shall  derive 
great  benefit.    I  feel  assured  that  our  legislators  will  not  neglect  their  duty. 

Lex. 
A  Cry  From  Kern. 

Bakekspield,  February  18. — Kern  county,  could  our  people  be  brought 
together,  would  respond  as  a  unit  to  the  sentiments  expressed  in  recent 
issues  of  the  Examiner.  We  want  something  done  in  the  way  of  legislation 
on  this  irrigation  question,  and  we  must  have  it  done  before  the  adjourn- 
ment of  the  present  Legislature.  Down  here  in  Kern  wejiave  had  less  than 
our  usual  rainfall,  and  the  prospect  looks  gloomy.  JNow,  Mr.  Editor,  I 
am  no  scribe,  and  I'm  not  a  man  to  make  threats,  but  if  something  is  not 
done  to  give  us  homesteaders  equal  rights  with  those  who  have  special  priv- 
ileges, there  will  be  a  day  of  reckoning  in  Kern,  and  please  don't  foi:getMtA 
We  are  looking  for  a  dry  season,  for  one  year  ago  we  were  getting  lots  of  wet. 
We  are  short  now,  and  if  we  have  a  bad  year,  the  riparianists  won't  have^uy 
rights  that  will  be  worth  respecting  down  this  way,     I  am  a 

Deep  Ditch  Digoee. 


91 


Shasta^s  Say, 

Anderson,  February  20. — Will  you  please,  Mr.  Editor,  say  something  for 
Shasta?  It  is  true  we  have  said  or  done  little  in  the  irrigation  struggle,  but  I 
assure  you,  sir,  that  we,  at  least  we  who  live  in  and  about  Anderson,  fully  ap- 
preciate the  situation  and  look  with  a  great  degree  of  interest  upon  the  strug- 
gle now  pending  in  the  State  Capitol.  We  have  made  every  effort  during  the 
past  two  or  three  years  to  attract  immigration  hereto  Shasta,  and  with  good 
results,  too.  But  we  are  not  satisfied.  Like  Oliver  Twist,  we  call  for  more. 
We  have  plenty  of  water,  and  an  expanse  of  fertile  lands  as  large  as  my  old 
State  of  Missouri,  but  what  we  want  is  a  system  of  irrigation  which  will  prop- 
erly distribute  the  water.  Shasta  is  alive  on  the  irrigation  business.  Push 
on  the  fight  and  let  us  have  the  question  settled.  B.  G.  F. 

Near  tlie  Sierra  Madre, 

DuARTE  (Los  Angeles  County),  February   17. — The  Duarte  is  one  of  the 

best  improved  and  most  densely  populated  settlements  in  Los  Angeles  county. 

Our  people  here  are  wholly  dependent  upon  a  stream  of  water  which  we  have 

brought  at  a  great  cost  through  a  cemented  flume  over  a  sandy   wilderness. 

We  do  not  own  the  lands  over  which  our  water  is  brought,  but  if  some  one 

should  enter  these  worthless  lands,  which  are  virtually  the  bed  of  the  San 

Gabriel  river,  then,  if  the  idea  of  "riparian  rights  "  holds  good,  our  Duarte, 

the  natural  orange-producing  section  of  Southern   California,  would   be  at 

once  bereft  of  water.     Our  representatives,  Messrs.  Del  Valle,  Banbury  and 

Hazard  have  done  well  thus  far,  and  they  know  the  needs  of  this  section. 

What  I  would  suggest  would  be  that  Assemblyman  Banbury  would  present 

to  the  Legislature  a  few  statistics  showing  what  Los  Angeles  county  was 

before  we  had  irrigation,  and  what  we  have  done  since  Pasadena,  Alhambra, 

the  Duarte  and  Pomona  have  been  blessed  with  water.  Your  paper,  we  know, 

favors  the  irrigators,  and  our  people  rely  upon  the  Examiner  to  help  us. 

J.  H.  McC. 
El   Dorado. 

Pleasant  Valley,  February  23. — The  irrigation  problem  is  one  that  we 
are  all  interested  in  here  in  El  Dorado  county.  Pleasant  Valley,  my  present 
home,  has  plenty  of  water,  and  with  a  proper  and  equitable  division  a  large 
area  of  land  can  be  brought  under  cultivation.  It  is  a  mistake  to  say  that 
our  mountain  valleys  do  not  require  irrigation  and  are  worthless.  Give  us  a 
good  irrigation  system,  and  hundreds  of  our  now  almost  uninhabited  valleys 
will  become  the  homes  of  industrious  families.  I,  for  one,  favor  the  irriga- 
tion bills  now  before  the  Legislature  and  published  in  the  Mcaminer.  Their 
passage  would  be  good  for  the  State. 

Yours  truly,  B.  P. 

San  Joaquin  County, 

Los  Bangs,  February  16.— Please  publish  the  following  from  the  western 
portion  of  Merced.  If  the  Legislature  wants  to  do  something  useful  to  this 
section,  let  it  get  down  and  fix  up  the  irrigation  matter.    Here,  on  the  west 


92 


side,  we  are  poor,  but  we  have  some  rights,  and  we  want  them  protected. 
Los  Banoa  is  in  the  heart  of  a  fine,  fertile  section,  and  while  it  is  partially 
irrigated  and  a  number  of  new  ditches  are  in  contemplation,  we  want  more. 
What  we  ask  is  a  fair  share  of  the  water  on  the  west  side  of  the  San  Joaquin, 
and  if  the  question  as  to  riparian  ownership  of  the  water  above  us  is  not 
settled  by  legislation  now,  we  are  certain  to  have  trouble  here  before  the 
legislature  can  give  us  relief  two  years  hence.  We  are  pleased  with  the  ad- 
vocacy of  our  claims  by  the  Examine7\  and  are  waiting  to  see  who  are  really 
our  friends  in  the  Legislature.  We  are  on  the  outside  of  the  great  Miller  & 
Lux  ditch,  but  have  some  rights  to  water.  There  are  ninety-odd  families  in 
this  region  who  are,  or  expect  to  become  irrigators.     We  want  water  and  can 

pay  for  it.  D.  W. 

In  Mussel  Slougrh. 

Hanpord,  February  19. — About  the  only  topic  of  discussion  here,  at  Han- 
ford  just  now,  is  irrigation.  We  are  waiting  anxiously  to  see  whether  we  are 
to  be  left  in  the  lurch.  We  know  the  Examiner  is  "sound"  on  the  question, 
as  it  usually  is;  but,  Mr.  Editor,  we  know  that  we  have  little  to  expect  from 
a  Legislature  which  elected  our  old  enemy  Stanford  to  the  Senate.  But  as  to 
the  water  question,  we  are  all  "solid"  on  that  point.  Will  you  please  pub- 
lish this  as  my  prediction?  I  am  now  a  pretty  old  man,  but  I  can  write  and 
talk,  and  I  say  that  if  the  present  Legislature  fails  to  do  something  on  this 
most  important  of  all  other  questions  now  before  it, there  will  be  a  reckoning 
at  the  next  election.    At  least  we  will  have  our  say  down  here  at  Hanford. 

Pioneer. 
On  tine  Desert, 

MiNTURN,  February  19. — If  the  Legislature  would  adjourn  and  take  a  trip 
down  to  this  point,  stop  off  at  Minturn,  and  see  what  can  be  done  by  irriga- 
tion, it  would  do  more  than  anything  else  in  the  way  of  argument.  Here  we 
are  surrounded  by  a  fertile  region,  but  have  no  water.  There  is  plenty  of 
water  above  us,  but  it  is  not  preserved,  but  is  allowed  to  sink  in  the  sands 
and  is  lost.  A  few  miles  from  this  station  (Minturn)  Kohler  k  Co.  have 
established  a  vineyard  of  some  extent  as  an  experiment.  It  is  a  success, 
and  within  a  few  years  this  part  of  the  State  will  become  a  well-populated 
region.  Although  I  am  a  new  settler,  I  cannot  see  what  objection  can  be 
urged  against  providing  for  a  system  of  irrigation,  which  will  do  so  much 
toward  building  wp  the  State.  I  know  that  all  we  want  here  is  water.  Give 
us  that  and  Minturn  will  become  quite  a  place.     Very  respectfully, 

E.  W.  Benson. 
A  Colony's  Condition. 

Ontabio  (Los  Angeles  county),  February  20. — Our  colony  is  yet  in  its  in- 
fancy, but  has  more  than  doubled  its  population  during  the  past  year.  It 
will  receive  a  new  impetus  if  the  Legislature  wo  uld  settle  the  irrigation  ques- 
tion. Will  you  please  inform  us  why  the  irrigation  question  cannot  be  set- 
tled? We  are  dependent  here  upon  water  for  our  lives.  Can  the  Legislature 
deprive  us  of  the  means  of  living?  Our  neighboring  colony  of  Cucamonga  is 
in  the  same  condition.    If  a  body  of  men  would  legislate  to  deprive  us  of  air. 


93 

which  is  absolutely  necessary  for  the  perpetuation  of  life,  would  we  not  be- 
come anxious?  Yet,  the  proper  distribution  af  water  here  is  as  important  to- 
ns as  the  unlimited  distribution  of  the  atmosphere.  I  write  at  the  request  of 
several  of  my  neighbors  to  put  these  questions:  Has  not  the  State  the  right 
to  regulate  the  distribution  of  water  in  our  streams?  Will  the  Examiner  urge 
the  Legislature  to  give  us  irrigation  laws  which  will  prevent  us  from  having 
trouble  in  the  future?  We  don't  get  too  much  water  in  this  region,  and  what 
we  have  we  want  properly  used.  J.  S.  M. 


Press  and  Horticultural. 

Irrig'ation. 

San  Bernardino  county  depends  largely  on  irrigation  for  its  standing  in 
horticultural  matters.  There  are  few  a  localities  where  can  be  found  moist 
lands  that  raise  successfully  agricultural  crops  without  irrigation,  but  as  a 
rule  moist  lands  are  not  so  good  for  fruit,  and  the  orchards  and  vineyards  are 
therefore  mostly  confined  to  the  high  and  dry  lands  that  are  irrigated,  while 
the  general  farming  is  confined  to  the  low  moist  lands. 

In  the  eastern  portions  of  San  Bernardino  valley  near  San  G^orgonio  Pass, 
there  are  thousands  of  acres  of  land  that  usually  mature  a  good  crop  of  wheat 
or  barley.  This  land  is  naturally  dry  and  has  no  water  for  irrigation  pur- 
poses, but  the  character  of  the  soil,  altitude  and  general  surroundings  is  such 
that  small  grain  crops  are  usually  a  success. 

The  sources  of  water  supply  for  irrigation  purposes  are  many  and  none  of 
them  very  large. 

The  Santa  Ana  river  where  it  comes  out  from  the  mountains  furnishes 
water  for  the  North  and  South  Fork  ditches.  The  North  Fork  ditch  fur- 
nishes water  for  Highlands  and  the  Cram  settlement.  The  South  Fork  ditch 
supplies  water  for  Lugonia,  Brookside  and  Eedlands. 

Mill  Creek  comes  down  irom  the  mountains  a  few  miles  southeast  of  the 
Santa  Ana  river,  and  furnishes  water  for  Craften  and  Old  San  Bernardino. 

A  stream  running  down  from  the  south  slope  of  San  Bernardino  mountain 
furnishes  water  for  Banning. 

City  Creek,  west  of  the  Santa  Ana  river,  furnishes  water  for  a  portion  of 
Highlands. 

The  stream  from  Devil's  canyon  supplies  water  for  a  portion  of  the  Mus- 
capiabe  rancho. 

Ly tie  Creek,  coming  down  from  Old  Baldy,  west  of  Cajon  Pass,  irrigates 
Mt.  Vernon  and  Vicinity. 

Etiwanda  canyon  irrigates  the  settlement  by  that  name. 

Another  small  stream  furnishes  water  for  Hermosa. 

Cucamonga  is  irrigated  by  a  stream  fed  by  springs  that  rise  just  north  of 
that  settlement. 

Cucamonga  canyon  irrigates  the  Iowa  tract. 

San  Antonio  canyon  on  the  line  between  Los  Angeles  and  San  Bernardino 
counties  is  equally  divided  between  Ontario  on  the  San  Bernardino  side,  and 
Pomona  and  other  lands  on  the  Los  Angeles  side. 


94 


San  Bernardino  is  situated  in  the  midst  of  moist  lands  where  artesian  wells 
•can  be  had  anywhere  by  going  to  a  moderate  depth. 

Warm  Creek  rises  from  springs  in  the  main  valley  away  from  any  moun- 
tains. This  creek  flows  into  the  Santa  Ana  river  east  of  Colton,  and  unites 
with  the  waters  of  that  stream  that  rise  within  a  few  miles  of  the  junction. 

The  Meeks  &  Daley  ditch  is  taken  from  Warm  Creek  and  irrigates  a  section 
of  country  below  Colton. 

The  Santa  Ana  river  in  ordinary  seasons  is  dry  for  many  miles  below  where 
all  the  water  is  taken  out  to  supply  North  and  South  Fork  ditches.  The 
waters  of  Warm  Creek  g,nd  other  smaller  tributaries,  however,  furnish  a 
good  stream  again  which  is  taken  out  by  the  two  Riverside  canals  to  irrigate 
Eiverside.  In  dry  seasons  these  two  canals  take  all  the  surface  water  out  of 
the  river  at  these  points,  leaving  the  underflow  to  come  to  the  surface  below; 
but  Spring  Brook,  which  rises  just  northwest  of  Riverside  replenishes  the 
stream  again. 

The  Jurupa  ditch  is  taken  out  of  the  Santa  Ana  river  that  irrigates  West 
Eiverside. 

The  Yorba  settlement,  including  the  property  of  the  South  Riverside  Vine- 
yard Company,  located  on  the  Santa  Anita  river  sixteen  miles  below  River- 
side, again  takes  all  the  surface  water  out  of  the  river  for  that  settlement, 
but  other  streams  coming  iu  from  the  north  side  of  the  river  makes  a  good 
stream  that  goes  down  to  supply  irrigation  water  for  settlements  in  Los 
Angeles  county. 

One  of  these  feeders  is  a  short  stream  that  comes  from  a  single  spring  that 
summer  and  winter  furnishes  250  inches  of  water  that  runs  a  gristmill  within 
a  mile  of  the  spring. 

There  are  other  small,  natural  water  supplies,  but  we  have  enumerated  the 
principal  ones  in  this  county. 

A  stream  of  water  for  irrigation  purposes  in  this  valley  is  considered  well 
■worth  $1000  an  inch  measured  in  an  ordinary  midsummer,  and  some  water 
rights  are  selling  at  a  higher  figure.  Hence  every  small  stream  that  can  be 
utilized  is  made  valuable.  The  value  of  water  is  of  course  dependent  to  a 
certain  extent  on  its  location,  for  a  small  stream  that  will  develop  a  small 
settlement  is  not  so  valuable  per  inch  as  a  large  stream  that  will  make  pos- 
sible a  larger  settlement. 

ARTIFICIAL  WORKS. 

About  all  the  natural  supplies  of  water  having  been  utilized,  people  have 
turned  their  attention  to  the  development  of  water.  This  is  done  in  three 
ways: 

1st — Artesian  wells, 

2d— Tunnels, 

3d — Reservoirs. 

There  are  artesian  belts  where  flowing  wells  can  be  readily  and  cheaply 
obtained.  The  artesian  belt  in  this  valley  is  now  pretty  well  defined,  and 
outside  of  this  belt  experiments  are  made  at  great  risk.     Usually  flowing 


95 


■water  is  obtained  in  the  moist  and  semi-moist  land  and  very  rarely  on  the 
high  mesa  lands. 

Tunnels  are  being  used  now  to  save  the  underflow  of  mountain  streams. 
Two  are  now  in  process  of  construction  in  this  country. 

Judson  &  Brown  have  one  in  the  bed  of  the  Santa  Ana  river  below  where 
the  water  is  taken  out  of  the  stream  to  supply  the  North  and  South  Fork 
ditches.  This  tunnel  is  not  as  yet  completed.  It  is  only  in  one  or  two  hun- 
dred feet,  and  yet  forty  inches  of  water  has  been  obtained  that  seems  to  be  a 
permanent  supply.  It  is  proposed  to  extend  this  tunnel  until  bed  rock  is 
reached,  when  it  is  confidentially  believed  that  a  large  supply  can  be  ob- 
tained. The  water  already  obtained  is  worth,  according  to  the  estimate 
giveo,  $40,000,  which  is  nearly  a  hundred  times  what  the  tunnel  cost. 

The  Ontario  Land  Company  has  driven  a  tunnel  in  under  San  Antonio 
creek  a  distance  of  nearly  1,800  feet,  at  a  cost  of  about  $25,000,  and  al- 
though the  work  is  incomplete  they  have  about  250  inches  of  water,  worth  a 
quarter  of  a  million  of  dollars. 

There  are  scores  of  places  in  the  county  where  tunnels  can  be  run  in  under 
the  beds  of  streims  where  they  come  out  of  the  canyons  upon  the  plains, 
and  the  underflow  saved  for  irrigation  purposes. 

The  first  attempt  at  a  storage  reservoir  in  this  county  was  made  by  Judson 
&  Brown  at  Kedlands.  This  reservoir  has  never  been  completed  as  at  first 
planned,  but  it  is  now  used  as  a  distributing  reservoir  only.  When  com- 
pleted it  will  hold  winter  water  enough  to  irrigate  several  hundred  acres  of 
land.  M.  H.  Crafts  next  commenced  a  storage  reservoir  for  Crafton,  which, 
when  completed,  will  be  a  great  aid  to  the  irrigating  system  of  that  settle- 
ment. 

BEAR  VALLEY   RESERVOIR. 

The  largest  and  most  gigantic  reservoir  work  yet  inaugurated  in  Southern 
California  for  irrigating  purposes  was  planned  in  1883  by  F.  E.  Brown,  of 
Redlands,  who  is  a  civil  engineer.  A  company  was  organized,  and  during 
the  summer  of  1884  the  dam,  300  feet  long  and  60  feet  high,  of  solid  ma- 
sonry, was  built.  This  reservoir  has  a  capacity  now  to  hold  water  to  irrigate 
2iJ,000  acres  of  land,  and  it  can  be  made  of  a  still  greater  capacity  if  it  is 
ascertained  after  trial  that  the  rainfall  of  the  water-shed  that  drains  into 
this  valley  is  sufficient  to  fill  a  larger  reservoir. 

The  winter  of  1883-84  gave  a  rainfall  in  this  valley  of  about  100  inches,  or 
four  times  as  much  as  fell  at  Riverside.  If  the  annual  rainfall  is  always  four 
times  as  much  as  it  is  at  Riverside,  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  present 
reservoir  can  always  be  filled  each  winter,  as  it  drains  a  country  extending 
over  sixty  square  miles. 
7 


96 


San  Francisco  Alta* 

The  Inconsistency  of  It. 

The  inconsistency  of  the  riparianists,  who  are  making  such  a  vigorous 
fight  before  the  Legislature,  stands  out  in  bold  relief  in  the  fact  that  most  of 
them  are  themselves  appro priators  of  water  for  irrigation,  though  under  the 
letter  of  the  riparian  law  they  have  no  more  right  to  do  this  than  land  own- 
ers a  dozen  miles  away  from  the  stream.  The  common  law  is  that  every 
riparian  proprietor  is  entitled  to  have  the  river  flow  by  his  land,  undimin- 
ished in  quantity  and  unafi'ected  in  quality,  and  this,  of  course,  cannot  be  if 
some  of  the  riparianists  take  the  water  out  and  use  it  for  irrigation.  All  the 
riparianists  below  the  one  who  devotes  it  for  irrigation  purposes  will  get  less 
of  the  stream,  and,  according  to  the  law,  will  have  a  good  cause  of  complaint 
against  the  diyertor.  But  in  this  State  riparianists  are  unwilling  to  abide  by 
the  law  under  which  they  claim  all  their  privileges.  They  want  to  use  the 
water  for  irrigation,  and  they  do  not  want  anybody  else  to  use  it.  The  irri- 
gators are  not  proposing  to  take  it  without  compensation,  but  to  pay  the 
riparianists  for  all  the  damages  which  they  can  prove  they  will  suffer.  But 
the  latter  refuse  to  have  it  taken  even  on  these  terms.  They  wish  to  use  all 
they  need  themselves  and  to  let  the  remainder  run  to  waste.  Such  colossal 
hoggishness  is  well  calculated  to  make  credulity  stand  aghast,  and  even  to 
paralyze  indignation. 

San  Francisco  Alta. 

Its  First  Duty. 

To-day  the  Legislature  in  both  branches  will  take  up  the  important  subject 
of  irrigation  as  a  special  order.  Considering  that  this  is  the  great  overshad- 
owing question  before  it,  the  Legislature  might,  apparently,  have  reached 
this  point  at  an  earlier  day  in  the  session,  but  there  is  still  time  enough  to  do 
the  work,  and  do  it  well,  if  only  the  will  exists.  Irrigation  legislation  is  a 
great  public  measure,  and  it  must  not  be  choked  off  by  petty  special  interests 
and  claim  grab  bills.  In  half  of  the  State  the  passage  of  irrigation  laws  is  a 
life  and  death  question,  and  to  the  other  half  its  importance  is  very  great, 
though  not  so  direct.  In  the  southern  counties  the  feeling  is  so  strong  that 
should  this  Legislature  fail  to  provide  the  desired  relief,  an  active  agitation 
will  be  begun  for  the  division  of  the  State,  and  in  a  business  way  the  antag- 
onism will  take  the  form  of  encouraging  Eastern  trade  at  the  expense  of  San 
Francisco  merchants.  The  Legislature  having  taken  up  the  subject  of  irri- 
gation, should  drop  other  measures  until  this  one  is  perfected. 


•     Daily  Expositor. 

The  First  Gun. 

We  congratulate  our  people  on  the  fact  contained  in  a  dispatch  from  Sac- 
ramento in  another  column,  informing  us  of  the  repeal  of  the  "old  English 
law  of  riparian  rights,"  by  the  Assembly  last  night.    This  indicates  the  sue- 


97 


cessful  termination  of  the  contest  between  the  irrigators  and  the  riparianists. 
Of  course,  the  bill  has  now  to  run  the  gauntlet  in  the  Senate,  where  the  ene- 
mies of  irrigation,  progress  and  prosperity,  together  with  their  cohorts  in 
the  lobby,  backed  with  large  sums,  will  concentrate  their  j&re  on  this  bill, 
and  no  effort  will  be  spared  to  defeat  it.  Public  interest  and  opinion  are  no 
longer  as  politic  moters  of  action  when  they  are  whelmed  by  the  lavish  com- 
pensation for  individual  interests;  hence  the  necessity  of  renewed  action  on 
the  part  of  the  friends  of  irrigation.  It  is  true,  we  have  no  money  to  pay 
for  legislation — were  it  required;  but  we  have  Right  and  Justice  on  our  side, 
and  we  believe,  notwithstanding  uncharitable  rumors,  that  a  large  majority  of 
those  occupying  positions  as  members  of  the  Legislature,  are  above  the  se- 
ductive wiles  that  will  be  brought  to  bear  upon  them  to  induce  their  support 
to  measures  antagonistic  to  the  best  interests  of  the  State.  We  have,  in  the 
passage  of  this  bill,  captured  the  outposts  of  the  riparianists,  and  a  prolonged 
fight  from  them  is  no  longer  probable  after  this  bill  goes  through  the  Senate. 
But  let  not  the  friends  of  irrigation  abate  in  the  least  their  interest  in  the 
matter,  but  let  them  rather  renew  their  exertions,  and  leave  no  loop-holes 
whereby  our  opponents  can  insert  a  reasonable  hope. 


San  Francisco  Post. 

The  Mmmin&r  is  trying  to  make  the  irrigation  issue  a  party  question,  and 
falsely  asserts  that  members  of  the  Eepublican  State  Central  Committee  are, 
in  their  official  capacity,  lobying  for  the  McClure  .Compromise  bill.  If  it 
thinks  it  can  make  any  political  capital  for  its  party  by  this  means,  we  beg 
leave  to  doubt  the  soundness  of  its  judgment.  The  immense  majority  which 
the  irrigationists  have  in  the  Republican  Assembly  should  admonish  it  against 
the  foolish  plea  it  is  making.  Only  the  Democratic  Senate  stands  in  the  way 
of  the  farmer. 


Riverside  Press  and  Horticulturist. 

The  Santa  Cruz  Sentinel  thinks  the  State  Irrigation  Convention  didn't  un- 
derstand its  business.  People  will  differ.  Some  of  the  ablest  lawyers  in  the 
State  were  present  and  gave  in  their  opinions  that  the  work  attempted  to  be 
done  by  that  convention  was  practical  from  a  legal  standpoint.  It  may  be 
that  the  legal  luminary  connected  with  the  Sentinel  can  overturn  those  ex- 
pressed opinions.  So  far  as  the  future  of  California  is  concerned  in  connec- 
tion with  the  late  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court,  reform,  revolution  or  ruin 
must  follow.  Let  us  hope  that  it  will  be  reform,  for  revolution  can  not  be 
thought  of,  and  ruin  the  people  will  not  submit  to. 


98 


Visalia  Delta. 

Irrig'ation. 

The  Sacramento  Capital,  which  still  continues  to  work  manfully  in  the  in- 
terest of  irrigation,  referring  to  work  in  the  committees,  says: 

"The  irrigation  committeemen  have  been  hard  at  work  all  week,  but  it  is 
very  much  feared  that  the  riparian  men  have  captured  the  Legislature,  as  it 
is  a  fact  that  they  are  spending  a  great  deal  of  money  to  defeat  the  most  im- 
portant measure  that  has  come  before  the  body  during  this  session.  It  is  a 
well-known  fact  that  the  appropriators  have  but  little  or  no  money  to  spend 
on  the  fight,  as  they  represent  the  bone  aad  vim  of  the  southern  part  of  the 
State,  while  the  large  landholders  are  backed  by  some  of  the  wealthiest  cor- 
porations in  the  State.  If  the  bill  does  not  pass  the  people  may  rest  assured 
that  money  defeated  it." 

We  are  not  ready  to  believe  that  a  majority  of  both  houses  have  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  those  men  who  have  combined  to  defeat  the  bills,  when  so  great 
an  effort  is  being  made  to  set  the  matter  before  the  Legislature  in  its  true 
light.  The  question  has  been  so  thoroughly  discussed  of  late,  and  so 
much  information  regarding  it  has  been  placed  in  the  hands  of  members  of 
both  houses,  that  we  are  still  hopeful  of  good  b^ing  accomplished. 


Grass  Valley  Daily  Tidings. 

Water  Monopoly. 

The  irrigation  problem  is  one  of  great  diflS.culty.  As  the  matter  now 
stands  something  like  three-score  of  men,  who  live  close  to  the  banks  of 
streams,  want  the  waters  to  flow  along  and  forever  undiminished  in  quantity 
and  unimpeachable  in  quality,  and  that  no  one  shall  have  any  of  it.  There 
is  more  of  it  than  the  bank-dwellers  can  use,  but  nevertheless  they  want  it  to 
keep  running  along.  They  say  they  are  afraid  to  let  this  water  be  tak^a  out 
of  the  streams  lest  monopolists  should  get  hold  of  it.  The  bank-dwellers 
want  to  keep  the  water  monopolized  in  idleness  for  fear  monopolizers  should 
get  hold  of  it  and  make  it  of  use. 


Los  Angeles  Weekly  Herald. 

So  far  the  irrigation  bill  has  made  good  progress  in  the  Assembly.  It  will 
be  remembered  by  readers  of  the  Herald  that  two  bills  of  this  kind  had  been 
introduced,  but  the  one  now  referred  to  is  that  which  was  prepared  by  the 
Fresno  Convention.  On  the  introduction  of  this  bill,  the  great  advantages 
it  possesses  over  the  others  were  so  manifest,  that  it  was  determined  to  let 
these  two  lie  on  the  table.  One  of  the  main  features  of  the  bill  is  the  doctrine 
that  the  common  laws  of  England  and  of  the  United  States  concerning  ripa- 
rian rights  should  not  be  applicable  in  this  State,  and  common  sense  would 
lead  one  giving  sane  attention  to  the  matter  to  the  same   conclusion.     On 


99 


Thursday  la^f,  and  again  on  Fri  lay,  Assemblyman  Walrath  moved  that  the 
bill,  which  had  been  reported  on  favorably  by  the  committee,  bo  taken  up 
out  of  order  and  read  for  the  first  time.  His  second  motion  was  carried, 
and  the  bill  was  made  a  special  order  for  to-day.  The  proceedings  of  the 
State  Irrigation  Convention,  held  at  Fresno,  which  were  reported  at  the 
time  in  these  columns,  are  so  well  known  to  readers  of  this  journal  that  it  is 
not  necessary  now  to  do  more  than  refer  to  them.  That  Convention  was 
composed  not  of  mere  theorists,  as  some  of  those  'who  went  as  Delegates  to 
the  Riverside  Convention  were,  but  in  the  main  of  gentlemen  who  discussed 
the  question  from  a  standpoint  they  have  taken  after  many  years  of  thorough 
practical  acquaintance  with  irrigation  in  California,  and  what  it  can  and 
should  be  made.  Just  as  the  meteorological  phenomena  of  California,  its 
climate  and  its  various  soils  dififer  from  those  of  other  lands  where  irrigation 
is  practiced,  just  so  the  law  of  riparian  rights  of  other  countries  may  very 
well  be  inapplicable  to  our  State.  At  Fresno  the  whole  subject  received  full 
consideration,  and  it  is  very  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  bill  under  dis- 
cussion as  these  lines  are  being  written  will  become  a  law. 


Tulare  Register. 

Assembly  bill  No.  410,  amending  Section  4488  of  the  Political  Code  of  our 
State,  so  that  the  common  law  of  England  will  no  longer  serve  to  bolster  up 
the  infamous  riparian  doctrine,  has  passed  the  Assembly  by  a  vote  of  50  to 
14.  It  now  goes  to  the  Senate,  with  every  prospect  of  becoming  a  statute 
law. 

San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Unfa.it hfal  Representativeg. 

The  relation  which  San  Francisco  bears  to  the  interior  and  the  importance 
of  the  rapid  and  permanent  development  of  the  agricultural  resources  of  the 
State  to  the  advancement  of  the  commercial  interests  of  San  Francisco  gave 
promise  that  the  legislative  delegation  from  this  city  would  yield  a  hearty 
support  to  any  measures  brought  forward  in  the  Legislature  intending  to  en- 
large the  area  and  increase  the  value  of  cultivated  land  in  the  farming  dis- 
tricts. It  was  not  believed  that  members  of  the  Legislature,  elected  to  rep- 
resent a  great  city,  and  expected  to  be  active  in  support  of  all  propositions 
calculated  to  multiply  interior  production,  and  correspondingly  enlarge  the 
city's  trade,  would  be  recreant  to  their  duty.  Nevertheless,  the  people  of 
San  Francisco  have  been  disappointed  in  their  anticipations.  Wise  measures 
were  presented,  having  as  their  object  the  confirmation  of  the  right  to  use 
the  waters  of  the  State  for  irrigation  purposes.  They  were  intended  for  the 
benefit  of  all.  Their  enactment  could  not  fail  to  give  a  new  impetus  to  the 
languishing  farming  interests  of  Southern  California  and  thereby  contribute 
to  the  welfare  of  the  city,  which  is  conceded   to  be  chiefly  dependent  upon 


100 


the  prospeiity  of  the  country.  Two  of  the  chosen  representatives  of  the 
city  in  the  Assembly,  disregarding  their  duty  to  their  constituency  and  cast- 
ing aside  all  consideration  of  public  interest  engaged  actively  in  the  bitter 
■warfare  waged  against  the  proposed  irrigation  measures.  Assemblymen  Mc- 
Junkin  and  Firebaugh  of  San  Francisco,  fought  and  filibustered  against  these 
bills  with  all  their  feeble  energies.  They  exercised  their  lungs  and  exhausted 
their  ingenuity  in  their  efforts  against  the  interests  of  those  whom  they  rep- 
resent. Mr.  McJunkin's  biography  up  to  the  time  he  was  called  to  represent 
San  Francisco  in  the  Legislature  is  not  written  in  the  annals  of  the  State. 
Mr.  Firebaugh  has  hitherto  never  emerged  from  the  obscurity  of  private  life. 
Mr.  McJunkin  claims  to  be  a  lawyer  and  in  that  disguise  has  shouted  him- 
self hoarse  about  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  irrigation  bills,  with  Mr. 
Firebaugh  as  a  distant  echo  of  the  same  views.  Their  arguments  have  been 
so  peurile  that  it  is  not  worth  while  to  answer  them.  But  the  people  of 
this  city  ought  not  to  forget  the  names  of  McJunkin  and  Firebaugh,  lest 
they  should  some  day  again  emerge  from  the  obscurity  to  which  their  oppo- 
sition to  the  irrigation  bills  has  already  condemned  them.  San  Francisco  is 
to  be  congratulated  that  the  unfaithful  in  connection  with  this  important 
matter  hiave  been  few. 


Marysville  Democrat. 

Too  Ijate. 

The  Sacramento  Bee  and  its  sympathizers,  after  attacking  the  irrigationists 
and  forcing  the'unnatural  alliance  of  that  class  with  the  hydraulic  miners, 
now  begins  to  beg  of  those  outraged  members  not  to  vote  with  the  hydrau- 
licers.  After  making  a  determined  effort  to  ruin  one  of  the  most  populous 
and  fertile  portions  of  the  State,  this  same  journal  turns  in  the  face  of  all  this 
and  asks  those  very  men  to  vote  for  the  interest  of  that  section  which  out- 
raged it.  We  have  seldom  seen  anything  quite  so  cheeky  in  the  course  of  our 
life.  We  begged,  we  warned  the  Bee  not  to  take  the  course  it  did,  for  we  knew 
the  Appeal,  which  cuts  its  trousers  and  trims  its  beard  after  the  style  the  Bee 
wears,  and  its  whole  kit,  would  run  oflf  into  this  fatal  mistake,  and  cut  off  all 
hope  for  this  portion  of  the  valley.  There  is  nothing  in  common  with  the 
irrigationists  and  the  objectionable  features  of  hydrauhc  mining;  and  the  al- 
liance of  their  forces  in  the  Legislature  is  all  unnatural,  and  forced  by  the 
unmanly  fight  of  those  who  are  continually  on  the  side  of  monopoly — the  Bee, 
the  Appeal,  and  others. 

San  Francisco  Examiner. 

A  DelnHion. 

The  Sacramento  Record-Union,  in  its  issue  of  yesterday,  in  an  edit6rial  en- 
titled "Saddling  Irrigation,"  declared  that  Assembly  Bill  No.  410,  as  amended 
by  the  Cpmmittee  of  the  Whole  in  the  Senate,  should  not  become  a  law,  be- 


101 


•cause,  as  thus  amended,  the  bill  will  reopen  the  "hydraulic  mining  question." 
That  this  is  an  entire  misapprehension  of  the  effect  of  the  amendment  is 
certain.  The  amendment  proposed  consists  of  the  insertion  of  two  words  in 
Section  2  of  the  bill.  This  section  as  amended  reads  as  follows,  the  amend- 
ment being  given  in  italics: 

"  Section  2,  Section  1422.  That  portion  of  the  common  law  of  England 
which  relates  to  riparian  rights  is  hereby  declared  to  be  repugnant  to  and  in- 
consistent with  the  climate,  topography,  physical  condition  and  necessities  of 
the  people  of  this  State,  and  the  laws  thereof  concerning  the  appropriation 
of  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation  [^and  mviing'},  and  to  that  extent  to  have 
never  formed  any  part  of  such  laws;  and  the  use  of  water  for  said  purposes 
of  irrigation  is  a  public  use»" 

The  JRocord- Union  says  of  the  amendment; 

"There  must  be  no  irrigation  bill  passed  saddled  with  such  a  rider  as  is 
now  being  put  upon  this  bill.  Whatever  virtues  the  bill  may  have,  the  peo- 
ple of  the  Sacramento  valley  will  never  consent  to  a  reopening  of  the  hy- 
draulic mining  question.  Better  that  the  deserts  remain  unreclaimed  and 
parched  lands  go  unwatered  than  that  the  law  be  blotted  out,  which  is  to-day 
the  safeguard  of  the  people  against  the  unnatural  descent  of  mining  debris 
and  slickens,  and  which,  if  unchecked,  would  render  the  fertile  regions  along 
the  Sacramento  River  uninhabitable  and  utterly  destroy  the  navagability  of 
the  chief  free  highway  of  the  State." 

We  mast  conclude  from  this  that  the  Record-Union  is  either  an  enemy 
of  the  bill  as  it  was  passed  by  the  Assembly,  or  is  most  egregiously 
mistaken  as  to  the  effect  of  the  amendment.  The  section  as  amended 
declares  that  the  right  to  appropriate  water  for  mining  is  repugnant  to  and 
inconsistent  with  the  common  law  of  England  relating  to  rip'arian  rights. 
This  declaration  does  not  give  the  miners  any  rights  which  they  have  not 
now  got. 

The  law  of  prigr  appropriation  has  always  prevailed  and  now  prevails  in 
the  mining  regions  of  the  State;  but  this  right  of  appropriation  does  not,  ac- 
cording to  the  decisions  of  the  United  States  Courts,  give  the  miner  the  right 
to  deposit  his  debris  in  the  streams  to  be  carried  down  upon  the  farming 
lands  below.  It  was  contended  before  the  courts  in  these  cases  that,  because 
the  miners  had  the  recognized  right  to  appropriate  water  for  mining  the  right 
to  deposit  debris  in  the  streams  must  follow  therefrom,  because  such  deposit 
resulted  from  the  use  of  the  water  in  mining.  In  other  words,  it  was  con- 
tended that  the  right  to  deposit  debris  in  the  streams  followed  by  implication 
perhaps,  might  appropriate  water,  this  did  not  give  him  the  right  to  deposit 
from  the  right  to  appropriate  the  water;  but  the  Courts  held  that  while  the 
miner,  his  debris  in  the  streams.  Judge  Sawyer,  in  the  case  of  Woodruff  vs. 
North  Bloomfield  Mining  Company,  held  that,  even  if  a  law  had  been  passed 
expressly  authorizing  the  deposit  of  mining  debris  into  the  navigable  streams, 
such  law  would  be  invalid  and  void.  Speaking  of  the  power  of  Congress  to 
pass  such  a  law,  Judge  Sawyer  said: 


.^  ; ;  -^^  -r:  102 

"But  if  Congress  had  attempted  to  authorize  an  unlimited  discharge  of 
mining  debris  into  the  navigable  waters  of  the  State,  to  the  destruction  of 
or  great  injury  to  their  navigability,  it  had  not  the  power  to  render  it  lawful' 
(1  West  Coast  Rep.  201.) 

And  again,  in  speaking  of  the  power  of  the  State  Legislature  upon  the  sub- 
ject, Judge  Sawyer  said : 

"The  State  had  no  constitutional  power  to  authorize  the  acts  complained 
of,  and  any  statute  designed  to  effect  that  object  is  void."  (1  West  Coast 
Eep.  209.) 

It  is  obvious  that  the  bill  as  amended  does  not  expressly  nor  by  implica- 
tion give  the  right  to  deposit  mining  debris  in  the  streams.  It  only  deals 
with  the  right  to  appropriate  the  water. 

Now,  how  does  the  amendment  re-open  the  hydraulic  mining  question? 
What  possible  foundation  is  there  for  any  such  assertion?  Why  should  any 
friend  of  irrigation  refuse  to  vote  for  the  bill  because  of  this  amendment? 

The  right  to  appropriate  water  for  irrigation  is  denied ;  and  although  this 
bill  gives  this  right,  the  Record-Union  advises  the  friends  ot  irrigation  to  vote 
against  the  bill  because,  as  amended,  it  declares  the  right  to  appropriate  wa- 
ter for  mining.  This  is  the  only  reason  given,  coupled  with  the  assertion 
that  the  amendment  re-opens  "the  hydraulic  mining  question."  If  the 
amendment  expressly  declared  the  right  of  miners  to  flow  their  debris  into 
the  streams,  it  would  not  re-open  the  question,  because  it  would  be  a  void 
law,  as  Judge  Sawyer  has  decided,  and  the  friends  of  irrigation  need  not  be 
concerned  even  if  the  amendment  had  such  an  object.  The  amendment 
would  in  that  case  be  void,  and  confer  no  rights  upon  the  miners  with  respect 
to  the  debris. 

Senator  Cjoss  is  reputed  to  be  an  able  lawyer.  He  knows  that  the  right  of 
prior  appropriation  of  water  for  mining  has  been  recognized  in  this  State 
since  mining  began;  that  this  right  has  been  uniformly,  up  to  this  time, 
upheld  by  the  courts,  both  State  and  Federal;  that  before  the  United  States 
had  disposed  of  a  single  acre  of  mining  land  this  right  of  prior  appropriation 
was  recognized  by  the  ninth  section  of  the  Act  of  Congress  of  July  22,  1866, 
which  declared: 

"Whenever,  by  priority  of  possession,  rights  to  the  use  of  water  for  min- 
ing, agricultural,  manufacturing  or  other  purposes  have  vested  and  accrued, 
and  the  same  are  recognized  and  acknowledged  by  the  local  customs,  laws  and 
the  decisions  of  courts,  the  possessors  and  owners  of  such  vested  rights  shall 
be  maintained  and  protected  in  the  same;  and  the  right  of  way  for  the  con- 
struction of  ditches  and  canals  for  the  purposes  aforesaid  is  hereby  acknowl- 
edged and  confirmed." 

Senator  Cross  further  knows  that  Congress,  in  the  amendatory  Act  of  July 
9,  1870,  declared  that  "all  patents  granted,  or  pre-emption,  or  homesteads 
allowed,  shall  be  subject  to  any  vested  and  accrued  water-rights  or  rights  to 
ditches  or  reservoirs  used  in  connection  with  such  water  rights  as  may  have 
been  acquired  under  or  recognized  by  the  ninth  section  of  the  Act  of  which 
this  Act  is  amendatory." 


103 


It  seems  that  Senotor  Cross'  amendment  has  succeeded  in  stampeding  the 
Record-  Union,  or  else  that  paper  is  so  desirous  of  defeating  the  bill  in  ques- 
tion that  it  is  willing  to  raise  misleading  questions  and  issues. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Irrigation  in  the   Senate. 

It  was  only  on  Thursday  that  we  expressed  the  somewhat  confident  hope 
that  the  Senate  might  pass  the  whole  set  of  Fresno  bills  by  Wednesday  next. 
But  on  that  very  day  the  managers  ran  against  another  snag,  and  a  backset 
followed.  A  vote  on  the  bill,  decliring  what  constitutes  the  common  law  in 
this  State,  resulted  adversely,  the  irrigators  only  poling  thirteen  votes  to 
seventeen  for  the  opposition,  while  ten  Senators  refused  to  vote.  There 
seems  once  more  to  have  been  bad  management,  and  our  correspondent  re- 
ports that  Green,  of  the  Fresno  committee,  now  despairs  of  passing  the  bills 
without  an  extra  session. 

Nothing  can  be  more  pitiable  than  the  littleness  of  mind  shown  by  the 
opponents  of  these  measures.  Each  Senator  looks  at  them  only  from  the 
point  of  view  of  own  little  bailiwick,  and  seems  unable  to  comprehend 
that  legislation  which  will  enrich  the  southern  half  of  the  State  cannot  fail 
to  benefit  every  section  thereof.  Cross,  of  Nevada,  for  instance,  comes  from 
a  mining  county,  and  stands  in  the  way  of  bills  to  promote  agriculture  in 
Fresno  and  Los  Angeles,  because  Nevada  does  not  seem  to  get  her  share.  It 
ought  to  be  plain  enough  to  his  mind  that  if  agriculture  takes  a  fresh  start 
in  the  south  and  vast  tracts  of  land  are  reclaimed  by  irrigation,  there  will  be 
an  increase  of  wealth,  and  new  capital  to  develop  all  kinds  of  enterprises, 
including  the  mines  of  Nevada.  There  is  not  a  section  of  the  State,  from 
Del  Norte  south,  that  would  not  share  in  the  prosperity  which  irrigation  will 
create.  Yet,  for  the  sake  of  some  two-penny  mining  ditches  in  the  Sierra, 
Cross  and  his  allies  stand  in  the  path  of  the  irrigators,  and  resort  to  dodge 
after  dodge  to  defeat  legislation — though,  by  so  doing,  they  are  cutting  off 
their  own  noses. 

After  the  action  of  the  Senate  on  the  Heath  Constitutional  amendment,  no 
reasonable  person  will  be  surprised  at  anything  that  body  may  do.  But  there 
are  degrees  in  public  contempt.  It  has  been  claimed  that  a  man  may  be  a 
railway  tool,  yet  otherwise  worthy  of  respect.  We  confess  we  cannot  see  it 
in  that  light,  but  it  is  easy  to  understand  that  a  Senator  may  intensify  his 
unpopularity  by  following  up  one  improper  act  by  another  and  yet  another. 
A  man  who  has  made  himself  distrusted  by  surrendering  to  the  monopoly^ 
may  render  himself  perfectly  odious  by  resisting  the  development  of  the 
southern  counties.  That  is  what  the  railway  men,  who  are  opposing  irriga- 
tion, are  now  doing.  They  seem  bent  oji  proving  to  the  public  that  they 
cannot  be  trusted  on  any  subject. 

A  rumor  has  been  current  for  some  days  that  the  chief  friends  of  the  rail- 
way are  quietly  opposing  the  irrigation  bills.     This  would  be  curious,  for  no 


104 


one  is  more  interested  in  the  development  of  the  southern  counties  than  the 
owners  of  the  Southern  Pacific.  But  the  railway  managers  often  display  so 
much  cussedness  and  so  little  tact,  that  the  thing  is  perhaps  not  impossible. 


Alta  California. 

Strang^ling:  the  Irxi£fation  Bills. 

Senator  Cross  of  Nevada  yesterday  secured  the  passage  of  an  amendment  to 
the  Wigginton  Irrigation  bill  in  the  Senate,  which,  unless  reconsidered,  effect- 
ually strangles  the  bill  for  this  session.  The  amendment  has  every  appear- 
ance of  being  designed  by  the  author  to  effect  this  result.  The  bill  is  amend- 
ed so  as  now  to  declare  that  the  common  law  of  riparian  rights  is  inconsistent 
with  the  appropriation  of  water  for  mining  purposes,  as  well  as  for  irrigation. 
The  original  bill  omitted  any  mention  of  water  for  mining  purposes.  The 
people  of  Nevada  county  will  not  be  deceived  by  the  false  pretense  that  this 
amendment  is  of  any  benefit  to  miners  or  mining.  Nor  need  the  people  of 
the  Sacramento  Valley  be  alarmed  at  its  possible  effect  upon  their  great  chan- 
nel of  commerce,  the  Sacramento  river.  The  legal  effect  of  the  amendment  is 
not  to  extend  the  rights  of  miners,  nor  to  authorize  the  renewal  of  hydraulic 
mining.  Slickens  can  find  neither  encouragement  nor  protection  under  this 
provision.  Senator  Cross  perhaps  believed  that  he  could  win  the  miners' 
affections  and  drive  the  anti-debris  men  from  the  support  of  the  bill,  and  thus 
defeat  it.  As  amended,  he  favors  its  passage,  but  he  must  know  it  cannot 
pass.  To  become  a  law,  it  should  pass  as  it  came  from  the  Assembly.  To 
return  it  to  the  Assembly  in  time  for  passage  is  almost  impossible,  because 
the  end  of  the  session  is  so  near.  Even  if  this  amendment  were  intended  to 
revive  the  system  of  mining  which  the  courts  have  enjoined,  it  could  not  effect 
its  purpose.  The  Supreme  Court  of  this  State  has  not  only  put  an  end  to  the 
deposit  of  debris  over  the  Sacramento  Valley,  but  declared  in  the  most  em- 
phatic and  positive  terms  that  not  even  legislation,  either  State  or  National, 
can  revive  it.  In  the  Gold  Run  debris  case,  the  State  Supreme  Court  says 
that  "neither  State  nor  Federal  legislation  could  by  silent  acquiscence,  or  by 
attempted  legislation,  take  private  property  for  private  use,  nor  divest  the 
people  of  the  State  of  their  rights  in  the  navigable  waters  of  ths  State,  for  the 
use  of  private  business,  however  extensive  or  long  continued;"  and  in  speak- 
ing of  the  rights  of  the  people  to  the  use  of  the  navig^,ble  rivers,  says:  "  It  is 
therefore  beyond  the  power  of  Legislatures  to  destroy  or  abridge  such  rights, 
or  to  authorize  their  improvement."  All  but  the  wilfully  blind  can  see  that 
this  decision  raises  an  impregnable  fortress  against  any  legislative  invasion 
of  the  navigability  of  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  by  slickens  or  other- 
wise. In  the  Woodruff  case,  the  Federal  Court  re-enforces  the  State  Court 
in  establishing  this  unchangeable  rule  of  law. 

Aside  from  this,  it  is  absurd  to  attempt  to  extract  from  this  amendmentany 
•comfort  for  the  hydraulic  miner.  As  the  amended  bill  reads,  it  declares  the 
law  of  appropriation  to  be  paramount  to  the  common  law,  and  that  the  doc- 


105 


trine  of  riparian  rights  shall  not  be  applied  to  the  use  of  water  for  mining 
purposes  any  more  than  to  its  use  for  irrigation.  It  proposes  to  give  to  the 
miner  a  right  which  he  already  possesses,  and  which  he  has  always  enjoyed 
in  the  mining  sections  of  the  State,  the  right  to  divert  the  water  of  natural 
streams  and  use  the  same  for  mining — a  right  which  the  Federal  and  State 
Courts  have  always  conceded,  in  disregard  of  all  riparian  rights.  The  pre- 
vailing opinion  in  the  latest  water  case  decided  drew  the  distinction  between 
the  right  of  appropriation  of  water  in  mining  and  agricultural  districts,  which, 
by  necessary  inference,  admits  the  right  in  mining  districts  while  denying  the 
right  in  the  agricultural  districts. 

Senator  Cross  was  at  one  time  supposed  to  be  friendly  to  irrigation  meas- 
ures; but  either  the  supposition  was  mistaken  or  he  has  experienced  a  change 
of  heart.  He  is  said  to  be  willing  to  support  the  bill  with  his  amendment 
tacked  to  it.  His  accurate  knowledge  of  the  law  cannot  but  teach  him  that 
his  amendment  has  no  legal  force  and  will  add  nothing  new  to  the  law  of 
water  rights.  His  amendment  is  fatal  to  the  passage  of  the  bill,  and  if  it  fails 
he  cannot  escape  the  responsibility  of  its  defeat. 


Merced  Star. 

Irrij^ation  Meetini;. 

Last  week  a  petition,  brought  here  by  a  West  Sider  ostensibly  in  the  inter- 
est of  irrigators,  was  circulated  in  town  and  signed  by  many  of  our  citizens 
who  at  the  time  were  under  the  impression  that  the  petition  was  as  repre- 
sented "in  furtherance  of  bills  pending  before  the  Legislature  to  promote 
irrigation  interests  as  enunciated  by  the  Fresno  Convention."  The  petition 
as  delivered  at  Sacramento  proved  to  be  a  remonstrance  against  the  passage 
of  the  popular  irrigation  bills  and  declared  the  sentiment  of  the  signers  to  be 
in  favor  of  Kipariau  Rights  as  it  is  claimed  they  exist  now.  On  Saturday, 
W.  L,  Ashe  received  a  letter  from  Senator  Spencer  inquiring  how  and  why 
Merced  County  was  directly  opposed  to  any  extension  of  the  existing  rights  of 
appropriators  of  water  for  agricultural  purposes,  and  announcing  his  surprise 
at  receiving  such  a  petition  from  Merced.  Spencer's  letter  soon  became  a 
subject  of  general  discussion  all  over  the  town,  and  placards  were  soon  posted 
announcing  a  public  meeting  at  Leeker's  Hall  on  Monday  forenoon  for  the 
purpose  ot  ascertaining  the  true  public  sentiment  of  Merced  on  the  subject  of 
irrigation  and  rights  of  individual  irrigators.  The  placards  were  generally 
distributed  in  the  vicinity  of  this  town,  and  on  Monday  a  well-attended  repre- 
sentative meeting  was  convened  at  Leeker's  Hull. 

On  motion  of  W.  L.  Ashe,  Captain  Gray  was  chosen  Chairman  and  H.  H. 
McCloskey  as  Secretary.  After  a  discussion  of  the  importance  of  irrigation 
facilities  to  the  people  of  Merced  County,  and  the  possible  consequences  of  t|ie 
unrepresentative  petition  improvidently  signei  by  our  citizens  under  a  posi- 
tive misapprehension  of  its  meauiug,  a  committee  was  apijointed  by  the  Chair 
to  draft  resolutions  expressive  of  the  true  sentiment  of  the  meeting.    This 


106 


committee  consisted  of  G.  H.  Fancher,  H.  N.  Racker,  R.  H.  Ward,  W.  L. 
Ashe,  H.  H.  McCloskey  and  W.  W.  Gray.  After  adjournment  the  meeting 
reconvened  at  2  p.  m.,  and  the  following  resolutions  were  presented  by  the 
committee  and  discussed  and  approved  by  the  meeting. 

Whereas,  It  has  been  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  citizens  of  Merced 
Connty  that  a  petition  has  been  presented  from  this  county  to  the  Legislature 
of  California  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  misleading  its  members  as  to  the 
wants  of  the  people  of  this  county  on  the  subject  of  irrigation.  Therefore 
be  it 

Besolved,  That  we,  the  people  of  Merced  County,  in  mass  meeting  assem- 
bled do  hereby  declare  that  any  attempt  to  mislead  our  Representatives  or 
others  into  the  belief  that  we,  as  a  county  are  opposed  to  irrigation,  is  unfair 
and  unjust. 

Besolved,  That  we  highly  deprecate  the  unfair  manner  in  which  many  of 
our  citizens  were  led  to  sign  the  petition  referred  to  and  unite  with  them  in 
saying  it  was  done  under  misapprehension. 

Besolved,  That  we  heartily  indorse  Senate  Bill  210  and  Assembly  Bill  410, 
and  ask  for  their  immediate  passage. 

Besolved,  That  a  copy  of  these  resolutions  be  sent  to  each  of  our  Repre- 
sentatives, Hon.  J.  D.  Spencer  and  Hon.  G.  G.  Goucher. 

G.  H.  Fancher,  Chairman, 
H.  H.  McClosket,  Secretary. 

After  a  "very  intelligent  discussion  and  exposition  of  the  situation  and  in- 
terest of  Merced  County  in  the  general  use  of  the  abundant  waters  of  the 
mountain  snowfields  unrestricted  by  the  greed  and  injustice  of  possible  ripa- 
rian owners,  a  committee  of  three  were  appointed  to  present  the  resolutions 
of  the  meeting  to  the  Legislature  in  person,  and  to  urge  our  representatives 
to  vote  and  work  for  such  bills  as  will  most  fully  promote  the  interests  of  the 
irrigators  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  in  general  and  the  present  and  possible 
irrigators  of  Merced  County  in  particular.  W.  W.  Gray,  C.  Landrum  and  W. 
L.  Ashe  compose  the  committee.  The  resolutions  of  the  meeting  were 
ordered  telegraphed  to  Sacramento. 


San  Francisco  Post. 

Tlie  True  Inwardness. 

From  presentjindications  the  failure  of  the  irrigation  bills  seems  probable,, 
unless  the  session  of  the  Legislature  is  prolonged.  If  the  Senate  would  have 
passed  the  bills  as  they  came  from  the  Assembly,  there  was  still  time  for  the 
work.  The  amendment  offered  by  Senator  Cross  and  adopted  in  Commit- 
tejB  of  the  Whole,  to  make  Assembly  bill  410  apply  to  water  for  the  use  of  min- 
ing, as  well  as  for  irrigation,  will  necessitate  the  return  of  the  bill  to  the  As- 
sembly. The  time  is  too  short  for  this,  and  the  only  eflfect  of  the  amendment 
is  to  kill  the  bill.    The  amendment  was  never  offered  in  good  faith.    Senator 


107 


Cross  lias  been  conspicuous  in  his  enmity  to  the  irrigation  bills.  He  is  an 
able  lawyer,  and  woU  knew  that  his  amendments  were  useless,  except  for  ob- 
struction. He  knows  that  his  amendment  will  not  change  the  law  as  it  now 
stands,  nor  confer  on  the  northern  or  mining  section  of  the  State  any  priv- 
ilege which  they  cannot  now  exercise  with  unrestrained  freedom.  The  people 
of  northern  California  have  to-day  the  common  and  unrestricted  right  to  ap- 
propriate the  waters  of  their  streams  and  divert  them  for  either  mining  or  ag- 
ricultural purposes.  That  right  has  been  fully  and  unreservedly  confirmed 
by  the  Act  of  Congress  of  1866,  and  by  all  the  decisions  of  both  State  and  Fed- 
eral Courts.  The  riparian  doctrine  never  has  been  applied  to  that  section. 
The  very  latest  cas^  by  our  Supreme  Court  recognizas  without  hesitation  the 
rights  of  miners  and  ditch  owners  in  mining  regions  to  appropriate  and  divert 
water.     "We  quote  from  the  case  of  Lux  vs.  Haggin: 

"When  the  law  declares  that  the  riparian  proprietor  is  entitled  to  have  the 
waters  of  a  stream  flow  in  its  natural  channel,  without  diminution  or  altera- 
tion, it  does  so  because  its  flow  imparts  fertility  to  his  land,  and  because  wa- 
ter in  its  pure  state  is  indispensable  for  domestic  uses.  But  this  rule  is  no; 
applicable  to  miners  and  ditch  owners,  simply  because  the  conditions  upon 
which  it  is  founded  do  not  exist  in  their  case." 

The  Court  then  goes  on  to  say  that  the  conditions  upon  which  the  rule  is 
founded  do  exist  in  agricultural  districts.  Here,  then,  is  the  law.  The  Court 
in  the  same  breath  gives  Southern  California  the  riparian  law  and  northern 
California  the  doctrine  of  appropriation.  And  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
the  riparian  padlock  is  taken  ofif  the  northern  streams  with  no  limitation. 
Whether  for  irrigation  or  for  mining,  the  water  is  free  for  all.  Southern  Cal- 
ifornia discovered  this  state  of  the  law,  from  the  decision  quoted,  and  came 
begging  to  the  Legislature  to  be  placed  on  an  equality  with  the  north,  and  is 
met  with  refusal  at  the  hands  of  a  northern  Senator.  What  is  the  use  of  re- 
enacting  what  is  already  law? 

In  itself  the  amendment  of  Senator  Cross  is  harmless.  It  does  not  touch 
the  debris  question.  In  Judge  Sawyer's  decision  in  the  Woodruff  case  there 
was  no  question  of  riparian  rights  involved.  The  destruction  of  property  by 
the  deposit  of  debris,  without  regard  to  the  locus  of  the  property,  whether  on 
or  remote  from  the  banks  of  the  river,  is  there  held  to  be  unlawful.  The 
miners  are  not  forbidden  to  appropriate  water.  They  are  enjoined  from  so 
using  it  as  to  destroy  the  navigation  of  the  river  and  cause  injury  to  property 
wherever  it  lies.  These  two  propositions  that  the  Cross  amendmenf  gives  no 
new  right,  and  has  no  effect  upon  the  debris  problem,  point  to  the  conclusion 
that  Senator  Cross  has  deliberately  enlisted  himself  under  the  riparian  ban- 
ner, and  that,  under  his  leadership,  irrigation  in  Southern  California  has  re- 
ceived its  death-blow. 


108 
San  Francisco  Post. 

Tbirsty  Lands. 

"Wherever  water  can  be  elevated,  the  land  [Nile  Valley]  exhibits  wonder- 
ful fertility;  and  the  amount  of  labor  expended  upon  merely  lifting  water  to 
the  highest  attainable  level,  by  means  of  the  most  primitive  machines,  is  ab- 
solutely prodigious  as  well  as  continual,  for  a  few  hours'  intermission  would 
result  in  the  burning  up  of  the  crop.  At  the  line  where  the  irrigating  waters 
halt  the  desert  begins,  and  its  limit  is  as  sharply  marked  as  a  gravel  walk 
across  a  greensward.'' — General  Colston,  in  Century. 

Professor  Langley  has  prophesied  great  things  for  those  Qesert  lands  which 
are  merely  infertile  from  being  dry,  of  which  the  San  Joaquin  Valley — a 
region,  by  the  way,  about  the  size  of  Egypt — is  a  fine  example.  The  dififer- 
ence  between  desert  and  garden,  between  a  howling  wilderness  and  a  populous 
region,  is  one  of  water  plus  some  means  of  raising  it  (in  countries  where  the 
riparianists  do  not  bar  the  way,  as  they  do  in  California).  This  means  is  to 
be  the  solar  engine — run  by  the  sun's  heat — one  of  which,  the  invention  of 
Ericsson,  is  now  at  work  in  New  York.  This  is  a  vision  of  the  near  future" 
We  can  imagine  the  farmer  in  Southern  California,  instead  of  waiting  anx- 
iously for  the  inch  or  so  of  rain  which  may  come  or  not  come,  looking  at  the 
thermometer  while  it  climbs  above  the  hundred  mark,  with  the  comforting 
thought  that  his  irrigating  is  .being  done  by  steam  that  costs  nothing,  made 
by  a  fire  that  never  goes  out.  Then  shall  those  heated  lands  having  the 
greatest  need  have  also  the  greatest  water  supply.  Then  shall  the  desert  of 
Sahara  vanish,  as  did  the  "great  American  desert"  years  ago,  and  the  place 
thereof  shall  know  it  no  more,  and  the  melancholy  shadoof  shall  no  longer 
moan  for  the  ceaseless  labor  of  the  fellah  who  dips  its  bucket  in  the  Nile. 
Meanwhile,  it  is  just  as  well  to  settle  this  riparian  business  according  to 
principles  of  common  sense — ^just  in  anticipation  the  coming  sun  engines. 
The  common  law  has  been  called  "the  perfection  of  common  sense  " — that 
is,  in  England.    California  should  be  a  law  unto  herself. 


Watsonville  Fajoronian. 

The  Assembly  has  passed  the  JTresno  irrigation  bills,  three  in  number.  To 
correct  a  false  impression  that  is  prevailing,  we  will  state  that  Mr.  Heath 
▼oted  for  all  of  them.  Those  bills  passed  the  Assembly  in  good  shape,  but 
the  Senate  is  almost  equally  divided  on  the  irrigation  question. 

It  seems  strange  that  men  who  are  anxious  to  make  records  as  anti-monop- 
olists on  the  land  and  railroad  questions,  should  strongly  favor  riparian 
riphts,  thus  acting  to  the  detriment  of  {thousands  of  settlers  in  the  San  Joa- 
quin and  southern  valleys. 


109 


Los  Angeles  Times. 

A  Great  Irrigation  Sclieme. 

The  project  of  bringing  out  the  water  of  Rock  Creek  on  to  "Wild  Horse  Prai» 
rie,  as  suggested  in  the  Herald  last  summer  seems  to  be  in  a  fair  way  of  ac- 
complishment. Mr.  M.  L.  Wicks,  the  most  utterly  tireless  gentleman  in  Los 
Angeles,  is  already  at  work  carrying  forward  this  great  work  with  great  and 
intelligent  energy.  He  is  constructing  a  ditch  eight  miles  in  length  that  will 
water  4,000  acres  of  excellent  land  in  summer,  while  in  winter,  which  is  the 
best  time  for  irrigating  vines  and  trees,  there  is  water  enough  to  irrigate 
20,000  acres.  The  project  is  brave,  bold  and  important  and  will  be  crowned 
with  success. 

The  land  that  has  been  selling  at  $6  per  aore  without  water  privileges  in 
that  vicinity  will  be  sold  at  $10  per  acre  with  water  right.  This  will  make 
about  $40  for  an  inch  of  water.  Since  that  amount  of  water  at  Ontaria, 
Pomona  and  Riverside  is  considered  worth  $1,000,  the  difference  is  largely  in 
favor  of  Mr.  Wicks  and  his  highland  prairie,  which  is  nearly  3,000  feet  above 
the  city  of  the  Angels. 

This  location  is  admirable  for  growing  cattle  and  hogs,  barley,  buckwheat, 
corn,  beans,  peas  and  all  kinds  of  deciduous  fruits.  That  part  of  Los  Angeles 
county  is  shooting  ahead  at  a  tremendous  rate  and  still  with  increasing, 
velocity, 


Modesto  News. 

Irrig^ation. 

At  Merced,  a  few  days  ago,  the  people  of  Merced  county  gave  expression  to 
their  opinion  on  the  question  of  irrigation  by  the  adoption  of  the  following 
resolutions: 

Whereas,  It  has  been  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  citizens  of  Merced 
county  that  a  petition  has  been  presented  from  this  county  to  the  Legislature 
of  California,  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  misleading  its  members  as  to  the 
wants  of  this  county  on  the  subject  of  irrigation;  therefore  be  it 

Resolved,  That  we,  the  people  of  this  county,  in  mass  meeting  assembled, 
do  hereby  declare  that  any  attempts  to  mislead  our  representatives  or  others 
into  the  belief  that  we  as  a  county  are  opposed  to  irrigation,  is  unfair  and 
unjust. 

Resolved,  That  we  highly  deprecate  the  unfair  manner  in  which  many  of 
our  citizens  were  induced  to  sign  the  petition  referred  to  and  unite  with  them 
in  saying  that  it  was  done  under  a  misapprehension. 

Resolved,  That  we  heartily  indorse  Senate  Bill  No.  210,  and  Assembly  Bill 
No.  410,  and  ask  for  their  immediate  passage. 

Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  these  resolutions  be  sent  to  each  of  our  represen- 
tatives— Hon.  J.  D.  Spencer  and  Hon.  G.  G.  Goucher. 

The  above  resolutions  were  unanimously  adopted  and  a  committee,  con- 
sisting of  W.  L.  Ashe,  W.  H.  Hartley  and  C.  Landrum  was  selected  to  go  ta 


110 


Sacramento  on  behalf  of  the  people  of  Merced  county,  in  the  interest  of  the 
bill.  Senator  Spencer,  of  Stanislaus,  and  Assembl^'man  Goucher,  of  Mari- 
posa, presented  the  resolutions  to  their  respective  Houses.  The  resolutions 
speak  for  themselves. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

If  the  Senate  fails  to  do  its  duty  relative  to  the  passage  of  the  irrigation 
bills,  it  will  not  be  for  want  of  knowledge  or  light  on  the  subject.  The  lead- 
ing San  Francisco  papers  have  labored  nobly  in  behalf  of  the  people,  and  have 
published  column  after  column,  covering  the  whole  subject  involved.  The 
Post  of  last  Saturday  had  an  excellent  article,  full  of  truth  and  point.  The 
Chronicle  has  given  the  subject  repeated  attention,  and  has  frequently  called 
the  attention  of  the  Legislature  to  its  duty  in  the  premises.  The  Alta  has 
labored  earnestly  ever  since  the  meeting  of  the  Fresno  Convention,  and  was 
the  first  paper  in  the  city  that  properly  comprehended  the  situation,  while 
the  Examiner  has  thrown  the  whole  weight  of  its  great  influence  in  behalf 
of  the  irrigators.  In  its  issue  of  yesterday  it  had  an  especially  able  and 
pointed  article  on  the  subject.  The  irrigators  will  not  forget  their  friends, 
who  have  rallied  to  their  support  in  this  their  time  of  need. 


Petaluma  Courier. 

The  Irrigation  Question. 

The  irrigation  bill  has  passed  the  Assembly  by  the  handsome  vote  of  fifty- 
one  for,  and  sixteen  against  it.  Legislation  upon  the  irrigation  question  is 
the  most  important,  considering  the  interests  involved,  of  this  session.  fThe 
old  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  has  to  be  reversed,  and  tbe  mam 
principle  of  all  sound  law,  of  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,  con- 
trol legislation.  God  Almighty  located  the  waters,  not  for  the  exclusive 
benefit  or  control  of  the  few  right  along  the  banks  of  the  streams,  but  in- 
tended them  for  the  use  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people,  and  the  large  dis- 
tricts of  country  between  them  as  well.  A  few  men  might  as_well  claim  the 
air  and  light  where  it  is  possible  to  control  them  as  the  water,  jiu  fact  they 
might  as  well  claim  that  being  first  settlers  they  have  a  right  to  exclude  any- 
body else  from  the  country  where  they  live,  because  it  might  interfere  with 
privileges  first  claimed  by  them.  The  necessities  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  and  the  general  welfare  of  the  State  should  be  considered  in  discuss- 
ing this  water  question,  as  well  as  the  rights  of  the  few  first  riparian  locators. 


Los  Angeles  Express. 

The  Sacramento  Bee,  level-headed  upon  most  subjects,  has  discuss6d 
"slickens  "  so  much  that  it  is  inclined  to  fly  ofl"  the  handle  whenever  any- 
thing comes  to  the  surface  which  can  in  any  way  be  construed  to  affect  it. 


Ill 


By  some  incomprehensible  course  of  reasoning  it  construes  the  irrigation 
measures  now  before  the  Legislature  to  be.  in  the  interest  of  the  hydraulic 
miners,  and  is  therefore  fighting  them  as  hard  as  it  can.  We  cannot  see  that 
there  is  any  justification  for  this  association.  The  objection  has  never  been 
made  to  the  hydraulic  miners  that  they  consumed  too  miich  water;  it  has 
been  that  they  dumped  their  tailings  into  the  rivers  and  filled  them  up. 
rhey  are  now  prohibited  from  dumping  their  tailings  in  the  rivers,  and  vir- 
tually from  pursuing  the  business  of  hydraulic  mining  at  all.  Drift  miners, 
however,  require  water,  and  so  do  quartz  miners.  It  is  not  contended  that 
either  drift  mining  or  quartz  mining  does  any  damage  to  the  streams.  "Why, 
then,  should  there  be  any  objection  to  their  obtaining  as  much  water  as  they 
require  through  legal  methods,  and  why  should  not  the  legal  methods  be  the 
same  to  the  miners  as  to  their  modest  requirements  as  to  other  classes  of 
water  consumers?  In  cases  where  there  are  no  real  conflicts  of  in- 
terest, it  appears  to  us  to  be  bad  policy  to  construct  such  conflicts  artificially. 
If  the  owners  of  the  land  along  running  streams  are  the  exclusive  owners  of 
the  water,  of  course  the  interests  of  miners  and  agriculturists  in  the  back 
countries  must  all  die  together.  Is  that  the  end  to  which  the  Bee  is  directing 
its  efforts  ? 


Modesto  Eepublican. 

*»So  Say  We  All  of  Us." 

"  We  hope  that  a  roll-call  on  the  irrigation  measures  will  soon  be  obtained 
in  the  State  Senate.  We  want  a  list  of  the  men  who  are  ready  to  fall  down 
before  the  Bull  of  Basham  or  Golden  Calf  of  the  cattle  kings.  We  want  a 
record  of  those  recreant  representatives  for  future  reference.  We  want  to 
watch  them  closely,  and  every  time  one  sticks  his  head  up  for  office  we  want 
to  hit  it.  The  people  of  the  State  demand  the  passage  of  suitable  irrigation 
laws,  and  those  who  oppose  the  bills  now  pending  are  defying  the  will  of 
their  masters — the  people.-  --FVesno  Expositor. 

We  concur,  and  we  don't  want  to  hit  their  heads  with  a  stuffed  club,  either, 
but  with  a  two-ton  pile  driver  hammer,  and  drive  them  so  deep  into  the 
ground  that  the  sound  of  Gabriel's  trumpet  on  the  resurrection  morn  will 
not  reach  them. 

Lux  &  Miller  are  the  great  riparian  claimants  in  this  valley,  and  according 
to  their  own  showing  are  robbing  other  riparian  claimants  on  the  San  Joa- 
quin river.  There  are  older  settlers  on  the  banks  of  the  river  than  Miller  & 
Lux,  and  their  lands  are  located  below  the  point  where  they  tap  the  stream. 
Now,  suppose  those  riparian  proprietors  should  take  a  notion  into  their 
heads  to  ask  Messrs.  Miller  &  Lux  to  swallow  some  of  their  own  medicine, 
what  then  ? 
8 


112 
Sacramento  Sunday  Capital. 

A  Dangerous  Amendment, 

An  eflfort  is  being  made  to  amend  Senate  bill  210  declaring  against 
riparian  rights,  or  the  English  common  law.  Our  Supreme  Court  has  shown 
a  disposition  to  sustain  confining  the  water  of  the  flowing  streams  to  the 
natural  channels  and  preventing  its  use  in  this  State  for  the  most  necessary 
purposes,  by  a  proviso  giving  to  riparian  proprietors  the  right  to  flow  past 
their  premises  of  sufficient  water  for  stock  and  domestic  purposes.  This 
seems  so  fair  and  reasonable  on  its  face  that  it  has  inclined  many  legislators, 
unacquainted  through  personal  knowledge  and  experience  with  the  questions 
involved  in  this  momentous  subject  of  irrigation,  to  look  upon  it  with 
favor.  But  we  assert  that  this  apparently  fair  and  reasonable  provision  in 
its  practical  effect  would  nullify  all  irrigation  legislation,  effectually  check 
the  prosperity  of  the  southern  part  of  the  State  and  cause  it  to  retrograde  in 
the  path  of  progress  as  fast  as  it  has  hitherto  advanced.  To  make  this  clear 
we  set  out  by  stating  a  fact  familiar  to  every  resident  of  that  section,  or  any 
other  arid  country,  that  the  largest  end  of  every  stream  is  upward,  and  the 
little  end  downward ;  or,  in  other  words,  while  the  streams  issue  from  the 
mountains  bold  and  strong  they  grow  rapidly  smaller  as  they  advance  into 
the  dry  plains  until,  except  in  flood  times,  by  evaporation  and  absorption, 
they  sink  and  disappear  altogether.  A  few  miles  be  yond  these  points  of 
disappearance,  where  the  floods  reach,  spread  over  extensive  tracts  and 
make  swamps,  are  the  lands  of  the  riparians — swamp  lands  so-called,  for 
which  they  have  obtained  title  from  the  State  by  the  construction  of  drain- 
age works,  or  levees  to  prevent  overflow — the  men  who  are  opposing  the 
irrigation  bills  now  before  the  Legislature.  They  hope,  through  the  absurd 
law  referred  to,  to  practically  own  all  these  streams  and  hold  all  the  vast 
interests  above  them  at  their  mercy.  This  they  now  see  they  cannot  hope 
to  accomplish  on  the  bare  monstrous  proposition ^^involved  in  the  common 
law,  and  hence  this  amendment  giving  them  more  than  they  could  have  if 
never  a  drop  of  water  had  been  diverted  above  them.  It  was  only  in  flood 
time,  in  the  unchanged  natural  conditions,  that  water  reached  them  at  all, 
and  then  came  a  superabundance  forming  lakes  and  ponds  lasting  all  the 
season,  while  in  the  normal  stages  of  the  streams  they  disappeared  miles 
before  they  reached  the  lands  that  in  flood  time  they  submerged.  What  is 
the  effect  then  of  this  amendment?  Is  it  not  to  give  these  alleged  riparians 
all  they  could  get  under  the  broadest  construction  of  the  common  law?  To 
give  them  water  for  stock  and  domestic  purposes,  when  the  streams  are  not 
in  flood,  and  water  is  most  needed  for  irrigation,  would  be  to  compel  every 
drop  to  remain  in  the  channels  to  sink  in  the  sands  long  before  it  reached 
their  lands,  giving  them  power  to  levy  tribute  on  the  agricultural  interests 
above  them  in  millions  of  dollars  annually.  Besides  all  these  riparians — 
cattle  men — have  long  since  found  that  the  stagnant  alkaline  water  festering 
in  ponds,  sloughs  and  tule  swamps,  under  the  burning  sun  of  the  dry  sea- 
son, is  injurious  to  their  stock  and  have  substituted^ with  infinite  pecuniary 


113 


advantage,  the  cold,  pure  water  of  artesian  and  other  wells,  which  is  found 
in  abundance  near  the  surface.  The  irrigation  bills  provide  for  the  payment 
to  them  of  all  damage  that  may  result  from  the  diversion  of  water  above 
them  which  must  in  time  again  reach  them  more  permanently  by  percolation, 
as  we  have  elsewhere  shown;  but  with  this,  which  would  satisfy  all  men  in 
every  other  walk  of  life  actuated  by  the  ordinary  considerations  of  interest 
and  business,  they  are  not  satisfied.  And  this  being  so,  in  the  light  of  the 
plain  truthful  relation  of  facts  given  above,  what  are  we  to  think?  It  is 
impossible  to  view  it  in  any  other  light  than  that  they  are  striving  (to  put 
it  in  the  mildest  form)  to  effect  a  huge  speculation,  in  violation  of  justice, 
right  and  public  policy.  More  plainly  speaking,  they  are  using  an  imaginary 
advantage  as  Shy  lock  did.  The  payment  of  their  bond  is  not  enough;  a 
dozen  men  at  most  insist  upon  being  given  the  power  to  draw  the  life  blood 
from  the  fairest  agricultural  region  of  the  State.  They  scorn  the  money 
vdlue  of  their  claims.  They  want  the  blood  and  life  of  those  over  whom 
they  imagine  the  law  gives  them  an  advantage.  Hopeless  of  having  this 
openly  confirmed  they  have  resorted  to  insidious  methods,  trusting  that 
they  may  thus  grasp  the  prize  they  cannot  gain  openly.  It  should  be  borne 
in  mind  that  in  taking  away  and  paying  these  men  for  their  alleged  riparian 
rights,  the  same  rights  still  remain  to  them  that  are  common  to  all.  They 
may  become  appropriators  of  water  connecting  with  the  irrigating  systems 
above  them  so  as  to  convey  water  with  as  little  waste  as  possible,  and  in  the 
seasons  of  overflow  they  will  still  have,  the  only  time  they  ever  had  it,  more 
water  than  they  want. 


Alta  California. 

Tbe  Fresno  Convention   Billg. 

The  address  of  the  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Con- 
vention, just  issued,  has  been  laid  before  the  Legislature  and  the  people.  It 
is  a  calm  and  temperate,  but  strong  appeal  in  behalf  of  the  proposed  irriga- 
tion legislation  now  under  consideration.  In  an  appendix  to  the  pamphlet 
containing  the  printed  address  is  to  be  found  a  reprint  of  articles  from  the 
press  of  every  portion  of  the  State,  endorsing  and  advocating  the  pending 
irrigation  bills.  The  Committee,  comprising  J.  De  Barth  Shorb,  Chairman, 
and  J.  F.  Wharton,  W.  S.  Green  (of  the  Colusa  Sun),  E.  Hudnut,  H.  S. 
Dixon,  L.  B.  Kuggles,  E.  H.  Tucker,  and  D.  K.  Zumwalt,  are  all  gentlemen 
of  ability  and  intelligence,  united  to  an  extensive  knowledge,  practical  and 
theoretical,  of  the  necessities  of  the  State,  the  utilization  of  water  for  irriga- 
tion, and  the  benefits  thereby  accruing  to  the  people.  In  concluding  their 
address,  the  Committee  says : 

'  •  We  submit  to  your  good  judgment  that  the  representatives  of  the  people 
have  also  good  right  to  declare  by  statute  the  fact  that  the  portion  of  the  com- 
mon law  of  England,  relating  to  riparian  rights,  as  expounded  by  the  Courts, 
is  repugnant  to  and  inconsistent  with  the  climate,  topography  and  physical 


114 


condition  of  the  State  and  the  necessities  of  the  people  thereof,  and  the  laws 
thereof  concerning  the  appropriation  of  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation.  In 
future  water  litigation  the  Supreme  Court  may  accept  it,  or  they  may  reject 
it,  as  binding  authority,  so  far  as  the  past  is  concerned.  Or  they  [may  con- 
sider it  as  evidence  of  the  fact,  although  not  conclusive.  But  with  the 
added  clause,  'and  to  what  extent  form  no  part  of  such  laws,*  it  will  govern 
their  decisions  in  controversies  arising  over  rights  hereafter  to  be  acquired. 
"We  shall  have  no  new  riparian  owners  to  put  stumbling  blocks  in  the  way  of 
irrigation." 

This  answers  the  objection  made  to  the  constitutionality  of  the  second 
section  of  the  Wigglnton  bill,  which  contains  the  declaration  against  the 
riparian  doctrine  of  the  common  law.  It  is  maintained  by  eminent  consti- 
tutional lawyers  that  all  so-called  riparian  rights  can  be  legislated  out  of 
existence  without  even  compensation.  There  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  Legis- 
lature should  act  to  the  very  fullest  extent  of  its  constitutional  powers  *in 
favor  of  irrigation.  If  this  second  section  of  the  Wigginton  bill  exceeds 
those  powers,  to  that  extent  the  Courts  will  annul  it.  Whatever  benefit  may 
result  to  the  people  from  its  enactment  should  not  be  lost.  If  this  section 
is  wholly  constitutional,  or  constitutional  only  to  a  limited  extent,  give  the 
Courts  an  opportunity  to  so  dfeclare.  Following  it  comes  the  section  pro- 
viding for  condemnation  and  compensation,  which  is  inserted,  not  as  a 
legislative  recognition  that  a  riparian  owner  has  any  rights,  but  to  establish 
a  mode  by  which  such  rights  may  be  made  subservient  to  the  necessities  of 
irrigation,  in  the  event  that  the  Courts  shall  hereafter  determine  that  riparian 
rights  have  a  place  in  the  jurisprudence  of  the  State.  The  presentation  of 
the  address  comes  opportunely,  at  a  moment  when,  reduced  to  a  last  ex- 
tremity, the  riparianists  have  engaged  in  an  abortive  attempt  to  enlist  the 
Bepublican  party  in  its  cause.  The  results  of  the  riparian  efforts  in  this 
direction  have  not  been  successful  outside  of  the  Republican  State  Central 
Committee.  Such  good  friends  of  irrigation  as  Senator  McClure  and  others 
are  not  to  be  dragged  into  deserting  the  people's  cause,  and  ignoring  the 
necessities  and  wants  of  a  million  people  at  the  instigation  of  a  few  moneyed 
Bwamp-land  monopolists,  nor  even  at  the  solicitation  of  narrow-minded  party 
managers. 

Daily  Post. 

Riparian  "Wrongs— Tine  TVater  of  the  State  Belongrg  to  the  Beneficial 
Users— A  Clear  Exposition  of  the  Fallacy  of  **  Riparian  Rijf  hts  **— 
The  Facts,  the  Law  and  Common  Justice  All  in  Favor  of  the  Appro- 
priators . 

Riparian  rights  are  public  wrongs. 
The  doctrine  of  paramount  ownership  of  water  in  rivers   by   riparian 
owners  is  not  founded  upon  right  at  all,   but  was  an  English  expedient 
for  settling  a  maze  of  difficulties  which  do  not  exist  and  cannot  exist  in  any 
part  of  America. 


115 


Riparian  ownership  of  water  is  not  founded  upon  right.  If  that  can  be 
demonstrated,  down  falls  at  once  all  the  gorgeous  superstructure  of  "  divinely 
ordered  inheritance,"  "  alienable  right,"  ''vested  right,"  "the  God  sent 
law  that  water  should  pass  untouched  from  the  hills  to  the  ocean,"  and  all 
the  bogus  assumption  of  superior  power  with  which  the  riparianists  have 
surrounded  their  position.  All  this  assumption  is  nothing  but  the  beating 
to  tomtoms  the  slow  music,  the  solemn  mummery  with  which  the  bene- 
ficiaries of  a  Druidical  mystery  befog  the  understanding  of  their  dupes. 
The  trouble  is  the  riparianists  have  asserted  their  rights  so  long  that 
they  have  got  to  believe  in  them.  They  start  out  with  false  premises.  Their 
opponents  answer  their  argument,  but  fail  to  cut  at  the  root  of  the  evil 
and  attack  the  premises.  The  irrigators  argue  about  expediency,  public 
necessity,  and  in  some  sort  of  shadowy  way  admit  that  the  riparian  owners 
have  rights.  It  is  not  so;  the  irrigators  have  all  the  reason  on  their  side,  and 
the  riparian  owners  nothing  but  a  bald  assumption  of  right. 

The  theory,  doctrine  and  law  of  riparian  ownership  sprang  from  a  state  of 
aflfairs  peculiar  to  England.  At  a  time  when  there  was  no  law  on  the  subject 
of  ownership  in  right  in  running  water,  disputes  arose,  which  the  Courts 
were  called  upon  to  settle. 

THE  SITUATION   IN   ENGLAND. 

The  courts  looked  abroad  and  took  a  birdseye  view  of  the  situation. 
They  saw  a  small  territory  with  a  surplus  of  water  and  a  scarcity  of  means 
of  transportation  and  motive  power.  They  saw  a  country  with  an  annual 
rainfall  of  80  inches  or  more,  in  which  the  hay  and  grain  were  ruined  by  rain 
one  season  in  three.  They  did  not  fail  to  note  that  the  water  courses  of  the 
country  were  pre-eminently  useful  for  the  purposes.  First,  as  a  means  to 
transport  the  products  of  the  country  to  the  seaboard,  and  second,  to  furnish 
power  to  grind  corn.  There  were  no  railways  in  those  days,  and  the  only 
competitor  of  the  schooner  and  barge  was  the  huge,  clumsy  farm  wagon. 
There  was  no  steam  in  those  days,  and  the  only  way  to  grind  corn  was  by 
windmills,  which  even  now  dot  the  thousand  hills  of  England,  or  by  huge 
water  wheels  on  the  banks  of  running  streams.  During  many  weeks  in  each 
year  the  wind  does  not  blow,  and  so  the  water  wheel  was  the  only  available 
power.  On  the  other  hand,  the  courts  saw  a  few  men  who  desired  to  ob- 
struct navigation  by  erecting  low  bridges  or  monopolizing  water  power  by 
damming  the  headwaters  of  streams,  to  the  injury  and  exclusion  of  mill 
owners  below  them.  The  courts  did  not  see  any  thirsty  plains  waiting  for  the 
coming  gladness  of  irrigation.  So  they  said  it  is  icise  and  expedient  to  con- 
serve our  rivers  for  navigation  and  for  water  power.  That  is  the  course 
which  will  bring  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,  and  that  is  the 
course  we  will  adopt. 

FOE  THE  PUBLIC  GOOD. 

Nothing  about  "God-given  rights,"  "inalienable  inheritance'*  or  "superior 
position"  in  that  decision;  but  simply  the  plain,  homely  doctrine — now  called 


116 


the  Americau  doctrine — that  the  interests  of  the  majority  must  rule  unsettled 
points.  The  English  judges  were  wise,  and  had  great  foresight.  They 
rightly  divined  where  the  greatest  good  lay,  and,  under  the  doctrine  of  ripar- 
ian rights,  streams  and  water  courses  have  been  saved  and  improved,  till  to- 
day there  is  no  single  spot  in  all  England  more  than  fifteen  miles  distant  from 
water  communication.  But  the  law  they  made — for  no  such  law  existed  be- 
fore they  made  it — was  a  hard,  fast  and  rigid  law.  It  said:  "You  shall  not 
touch  the  water  if  your  neighbor  below  you  does  not  want  you  to;  and  your 
neighbor  below  is  any  one  on  the  banks  of  the  stream,  down  to  the  very  out- 
let. You  shall  not  diminish  the  flow  of  the  water.  You  may  run  a  wheel 
with  it,  but  the  water  must  be  sent  back  into  the  river.  We  have  for  expe- 
diency established  this  doctrine  of  undiminished  flow,  and  there  can  be  no 
departure  from  it. 

This  doctrine  was  carried  out  to  a  ridiculous  point.  A  man  sued  his 
neighbor  for  diminishing  a  watercourse,  and  asked  for  damages.  The  courts 
ruled  that  the  man  who  has  a  homestead  or  park  upon  a  watercourse  can 
forever  condemn  that  water  to  idleness  and  disuse  at  his  own  pleasure,  no 
matter  at  what  cost  to  public  convenience,  because  he  has  a  right  to  listen  to 
its  music  as  it  flows  and  to  delight  his  eyes  with  the  sight  of  it  as  it  dances 
by  his  land. 

THE  SENTIMENTAL  HUMBUG. 

There  is  the  effect  of  the  riparian  rights  in  clear,  vivid  phrasing,  that  it 
would  be  hard  to  improve  upon.  The  man  who  owns  a  foot  of  land  at  the 
mouth  of  the  San  Joaquin  river  can  say  to  every  man  who  needs  water  from 
the  San  Joaquin,  the  Stanislaus,  the  Merced  river  and  all  tributaries:  "Touch 
not  the  waters  of  your  streams,  for  I  wish  to  delight  my  eyes  with  a  full  and 
complete  flow  as  it  dances  by  and  my  ears  must  be  tickled  with  the  music  of 
its  muddy  plash  to  the  uttermost  tickle." 

Such  a  doctrine  may  please  a  nation  of  dilettante — a  country  of  S3lvan 
sentimentalists;  but,  even  were  it  good  law,  and  based  on  right,  it  would 
never  be  allowed  to  stand  before  the  robust  common  sense  of  California  and 
the  neeSs  of  her  people.  But  it  is  not  law.  No  man  has  a  right  to  the  un- 
interrupted use  of  another's  property,  and  the  water  which  rises  in  the  Sierra 
Nevada  is  not  the  property  of  the  man  at  the  mouth  of  the  San  Joaquin. 
That  water  reaches  the  mouth  of  a  river  is  only  because  of  the  neglect  or 
inability  of  the  dwellers  higher  up  the  river  to  appropriate  it.  The  man  at 
the  mouth  takes  advantage  of  his  neighbor's  neglect,  lack  of  desire,  or  lack 
of  ability  to  use  their  property,  but  it  would  be  absurd  to  hold  that  such  neg- 
lect gives  him  title.  As  well  might  A  say  that  because  B  has  allowed  him  to 
ride  his  horses  for  years,  he  has  a  title  to  the  horses,  or  an  easement  in  them. 

All  water  is  first  the  property  of  the  man  upon  whose  land  it  falls,  and  if  he 
fails  to  use  it,  it  vests  in  the  State — is  public  property  and  open  to  public  use 
the  same  as  the  public  air.  How  utterly  contemptible,  how  silly,  does  the 
riparianist's  theory  of  ownership  appear  when  placed  by  the  side  of  the  only 
true  principle,  that  the  water  is  primarily  the  property  of  the  man  on  whose 


117 


land  it  falls,  or,  failing  him,  that  it  is  a  public  element.    Will  any  one  deny- 
that  first  title  to  water  rests  in  the  man  on  whose  land  it  falls? 

A   TEST  or  THE  DOCTRINE. 

Perhaps  some  riparianist may;  so  we  apply  the  test.  A  digs  a  pond  on  his 
land  into  which  rainfalls.  B  complains  that  the  flow  of  water  in  the  creek 
on  whose  banks  he  owns  land  is  diminished  by  the  pond  of  A.  There  is  no 
law  which  will  listen  to  such  a  complaint.  But  if  the  complaint  was  that  A 
had  obstructed  the  flow  of  a  stream,  the  case  would  be  difl'erent,  for  A  not  be- 
ing able  to  show  that  the  water  fell  on  his  land,  has  to  fall  tack  on  his  propo- 
sition as  an  appropriator  of  public  property. 

If  the  man  upon  whose  land  the  water  falls  fails  to  use  it,  then  it  becomes 
one  of  the  elements  for  the  use  of  the  general  public  under  regulations  for  its 
distribution. 

Blackstone  has  this  to  say  about  the  use  of  the  element:  "  Thus,  too,  the 
benefits  of  the  elements,  the  li>^ht,  air  and  water  can  only  be  appropriated  by 
occupancy.''  And  in  another  place  the  grand  old  law  expounder  says:  '  *He 
who  first  applies  the  elements  to  a  beneficial  use  has  the  right."  Nothing  in 
that  about  sentimental  use.  No  plash  of  murmuring  brooks,  or  glittering 
gleams  of  sunlight  on  the  rippling  stream.  A  man  can  only  own  water  by 
using  it  for  a  beneficial  purpose,  and  he  who  lirst  connects  his  labor  with  the 
public  element  has  the  better  title . 

Occupancy  alone  can  constitute  ownership  in  an  element.  The  riparianists 
are  not  occupiers.  Listening  to  the  plash  of  the  water,  or  fishing  off  the  end 
of  a  wharf,  or  allowing  one's  cattle  to  slake  their  thirst  in  the  stream  or  fatten 
on  marsh  grass,  does  not  constitute  occupancy  nor  give  title,  and  even  if  they 
did,  it  would  only  be  title  in  default  of  a  better  one,  and  it  would  not  hold  as 
against  a  better  title.  The  main  point  is  that  the  water  is  the  properly  of 
the  State,  open  for  beneficial  occupancy,  under  the  rule  which  applies  to  the 
public  land — "first  come,  first  served,  but  only  a  reasonable  amount  for  any 
one." 

THE  CASE   IN   A   NUTSHELL. 

It  matters  not  what  rules  prevail  in  England,  Spain,  or  Timbuctoo,  or 
what  construction  the  courts  have  placed  on  the  law  as  it  now  stands.  The 
State  owns  the  water,  and  after  conserving  the  two  navigable  rivers  will  allow 
the  remainder  to  be  appropriated  for  irrigation  or  mining  ditches.  The  ri- 
parian owners  cannot  even  set  up  the  claim  of  prior  right.  In  1846  the  ap- 
propriation of  water  for  mining  ditches  began  in  a  small  way  and  in  a  year 
numbers  of  ditches  had  been  built.  The  Nevada  Water  Company  located  in 
1850,  Bear  River  1851,  Bicknell  Ditch  1851,  Todd  Valley  1851,  Dixon's  1851, 
Natoma  Co.  1852,  Grass  Valley  1852,  Kilham's  1852,  Humphrey's  1852, 
Mokelumne  Hill  1852,  and  so  forth.  And  the  rights  of  all  those  ditch  own- 
ers have  been  confirmed  by  the  highest  court  in  the  land.  To  carry  out  the 
doctrine  of  riparian  rights  means  that  at  the  instance  of  any  owner. of  a  foot 
of  swamp  land  below  them,  these  ditches,  which  cost  millions,  can  be  de- 
stroyed. 


118 


Not  only  is  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  founded  on  so  flimsy  a  base  as 
"  English  expediences,"  but  it  is  absurd.  It  is  illogical.  In  efifect,  it  means 
that  no  one  shall  use  the  water.  Chief  Justice  Shaw  showed  this  in  the  fol- 
lowing terse  language:  "If  the  plaintiff  could,  in  a  case  like  the  present, 
have  such  an  action,  then  every  proprietor  on  the  brook,  from  its  source  to 
its  outlet,  will  have  the  same,  and  so  on  to  the  ocean,  and  because  none 
might  diminish  the  flow  the  rights  of  all  would  amount  to  nothing,  as  none 
could  put  the  water  to  any  use." 

Having  established  the  State's  right  to  the  water,  subject  to  appropriation, 
the  case  presents  no  formidable  difficulties  to  statesmen.  It  is  simply  nec- 
essary to  formulate  some  rule,  deciding  how  much  an  appropriator  may 
take,  and  defining  the  method  of  legal  appropriation.  It  is  of  no  use  wast- 
ing time  discussing  the  rights  of  riparianists.  They  have  no  rights  in  this 
cause.  If  they  want  to  use  water,  they  must  be  made  to  take  it  on  the  same 
terms  as  other  citizens,  and  not  expect  to  own  a  river  because  they  live  on 
its  banks. 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Irrigfation— Its  Importance  to  the  State  and  San  Francisco. 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Examiner — Sib:  More  than  thirty  years  have  passed 
since  the  waters  of  our  streams  first  began  to  be  appropriated,  diverted  and 
applied  to  the  cultivation  of  the  soil  by  irrigation.  The  early  settlers  who 
abandoned  the  pick  and  shovel  for  the  plow  watered  their  few  acres  of  barley 
and  vegetables  through  small  flumes  an^  ditches  conducting  water  from 
neighboring  streams.  Immigration  poured  in  rapidly,  population  increased 
enormously,  and  after  the  example  of  the  first  comers  it  came  to  be  the  uni- 
versal custom  to  take  the  water  of  the  stream  for  irrigation.  Natural  justice 
led  to  the  adoption,  by  mutual  consent  between  the  appropriators,  of  the 
rule  that  the  prior  appropriator  has  the  better  right  to  the  extent  of  his  act- 
ual diversion  for  a  useful  purpose.  This  rule  became  universally  recognized, 
and  was  adopted  and  enforced  by  the  Courts.  It  rested  upon  that  most  solid 
of  the  foundations  of  the  law — the  wish  and  consent  of  the  governed.  It 
became  the  common  law  of  California.  Under  its  supposed  protection  capi- 
tal and  labor,  energy  and  enterprise  were  embarked  in  the  development  of 
the  agricultural  resources  of  the  State.  Year  after  year  has  witnessed  the 
increasing  appropriation  of  water  for  the  irrigation  of  arable  land.  Probably 
one-third  of  the  population  of  the  State  is  now  directly  interested  in  irriga- 
tion. Very  few  are  there  who  are  not  interested  either  directly  or  indirectly. 
All  have  proceeded  upon  the  theory  that  the  appropriation  of  water  gave  an 
absolute  right  as  against  all  the  world.  For  over  thirty  years  it  never  entered 
into  the  wildest  dreams  of  the  owner  of  land  upon  the  banks  of  a  stream 
that  he  had  any  rights  whatever  against  an  appropriator  of  water  from  the 
same  stream,  other  than  what  he  himself  might  hav*  acquired  by  actual  ap- 
propriation.   And  now,  after  all  these  years,  when  the  magnitude  and  in- 


119 


creasing  importance  of  irrigation  interests  and  the  approaching  necessity  for- 
careful  and  economical  distribution  of  water  for  irrigation  and  mining  have 
made  the  time  ripe  for  legislative  regulation,  the  river-bank  owner  awakens 
from  his  thirty  years'  sleep  and  undertakes  to  tell  us  that  there  is  nothing  to 
regulate;  that  appropriators  have  no  rights  and  never  had  any;  that  irrigation 
is  robbery,  and  irrigators  are  highwaymen. 

That  is  the  long  and  short  of  the  riparianists'  argument  before  the  irri- 
gation committees  of  the  Legislature,  against  legislation.  They  say  that  we 
have  adopted  the  common  law  of  England,  that  the  owner  of  land  through 
which  a  stream  passes  has  a  right  to  have  the  stream  flow  in  its  natural 
state,  without  diminution  or  alteration. 

The  States  of  the  Union  have  accepted  the  common  law  only  so  far  as  it  is 
applicable  to  our  wants,  necessities,  circumstances  and  conditions.  This 
principle  is  established  by  a  unanimous  and  undisturbed  line  of  authorities, 
running  through  the  reports  of  the  highest  Courts  of  the  United  States,  and 
of  nearly  every  State  in  the  Union.  The  following  quotations  from  able 
Courts  and  eminent  Judges  are  the  basis  for  the  assertion  of  this  propo- 
sition : 

In  Parker  vs.  Foote.  19  Wend.,  N.  Y.,  p.  318,  Justice  Bronson  in  de- 
livering the  opinion  of  the  Court  (of  which  Samuel  Nelson,  afterward  ele- 
vated to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  concurring)  says:  *' It 
cannot  be  necessary  to  cite  cases  to  prove  that  those  portions  of  the  common 
law  of  England  which  are  hostile  to  the  spirit  of  our  institutions,  or  which 
are  not  adapted  to  the  existing  state  of  things  in  this  country,  form  no  part 
of  our  law. " 

In  Keats  vs.  Hugo,  115  Mass.,  208,  Chief  Justice  Gray,  now  on  the  United 
States  Supreme  bench,  approved  and  followed  Justices  Bronson  and  Nelson 
in  molding  the  common  law  to  the  existing  state  of  things  in  the  United 
States  and  not  applying  it  to  our  growing  cities,  were  working  the  most 
mischievous  consequences,  and  cites  decisions  in  Maine,  North  Carolina, 
Maryland,  Pennsylvania,  Vermont,  Alabama  and  Ohio,  based  upon  similar 
reasons. 

Justice  Lyman"  Trumbull,  illustrious  as  a  statesman  and  jurist,  held  the 
same  views  in  Seely  vs.  Peters,  10  Illinois,  142.  In  Coffin  vs.  Ditch  Com- 
pany, 6  Colorado,  446,  the  Court  say:  *'  It  is  contended  that  the  common 
law  principles  of  riparian  proprietorship  prevailed  in  Colorado  until  1876, 
and  that  the  doctrine  of  priority  of  right  to  water  by  priority  of  appropria- 
tion thereof  was  first  recognized  and  adopted  in  the  Constitution.  But  we 
think  the  latter  doctrine  has  existed  since  the  date  of  the  earliest  appropria- 
tions of  water  within  the  boundaries  of  the  State.  The  climate  is  dry,  and 
the  soil,  when  moistened  only  by  the  usual  rainfall,  is  arid  and  unproduc- 
tive; except  in  a  few  favored  sections,  artificial  irrigation  for  agriculture  is  an 
absolute  necessity.  Water  in  the  various  streams  thus  acquires  a  value  un- 
known in  moister  climates.  Instead  of  being  a  mere  incident  to  the  soil,  it 
rises,  when  appropriated,  to  the  dignity  of  a  distinct    usufructuary  estate  or 


120 

•right  of  property.  It  has  always  been  the  policy  of  the  National,  as  well  as 
the  Territorial  and  State  Governments,  to  encourage  the  diversion  and  use  of 
water  for  agriculture;  and  vast  expenditures  of  time  and  money  have  been 
made  in  reclaiming  and  fertilizing  by  irrigation  portions  of  our  unproductive 
territory.  Houses  have  been  built,  permanent  improvements  made,  the  soil 
has  been  cultivated,  and  thousands  of  acres  have  been  rendered  immensely 
valuable,  with  the  understanding  that  appropriations  of  water  would  be  pro- 
tected. Deny  the  doctrine  of  priority  or  superiority  of  right  by  priority  of 
appropriation  and  a  great  part  of  the  value  of  all  this  property  is  at  once  de. 
etroyed.  *  *  *  We  conclude,  then,  that  the  common  law  do3trine,  giving 
the  riparian  owner  a  right  to  the  flow  of  water  in  its  natural  channel  upon 
and  over  his  lands,  even  though  he  makes  no  beneficial  use  thereof,  is  inap- 
plicable to  Colorado.  Imperative  necessity,  unknown  to  the  countries 
which  gave  it  birth,  compels  the  recognition  of  another  doctrine  in  conflict 
therewith. 

In  Acheson  vs.  Peterson,  20  Wallace,  507,' the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  say : 

"  As  respects  the  use  of  water  for  mining  purposes,  the  doctrine  of  the 
common  law  declaratory  of  the  rights  of  riparian  owners  were  at  an  early  day 
after  the  discovery  of  gold  found  to  be  inapplicable,  or  applicable  only  in  a 
very  limited  extent,  to  the  necessity  of  miners,  and  inadequate  to  their  pro- 
duction." 

In  Basey  vs.  Gallagher,  20  Wallace,  670,  the  same  'Court  say  that  the 
views  expressed  and  the  rulings  mide  in  Acheson  vs.  Peterson  "are 
equally  applicable  to  the  use  of  water  on  the  public  lands  for  pur- 
poses of  irrigation.  No  distinction  is  made  in  those  States  and  Terri- 
tories by  the  customs  of  miners  and  settlers  or  by  the  Courts  in  the 
rights  of  the  first  appropriator  from  the  use  made  of  water,  if  the  use  be  a 
beneficial  one." 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  the  highest  Courts  of  the  United  States,  and  of 
nearly  every  state  in  the  Union,  have  held  it  to  be  their  duty  to  modify,  or 
refuse  to  apply,  the  common  law  of  England,  where  it  was  unsuited  to  the 
necessities  and  circumstances  of  the  commanity  or  locality.  The  Courts  of 
England  have  modified  or  cast  aside  parts  of  the  common  law  where  they 
have  found  them  unsuited  to  modern  emergencies. 

Are  our  necessities  and  conditions  such  that  we  should  have  accepted  the 
riparian  doctrine  with  the  rest  of  the  common  law?  Is  it  consistent  with  our 
climate,  the  physicial  conditions  of  the  State,  the  necessities  of  the  people, 
and  the  customs  and  usages  of  more  than  thirty  years,  to  say  that  a  stream 
shall  flow  from  its  source  to  its  mouth  without  diminution?  Nothing  is  more 
certainly  established,  beyond  peradventure,  than  that  irrigation  is  a  neces- 
sity throughout  the  southern  part  of  .the  State,  and  in  many  of  the  northern 
portions.  In  the  south  the  rainfall  is  so  slight,  the  climate  so  dry  and  the 
heat  of  the  sun  so  intense  that  the  melting  snows  of  the  Sierras  bring,  in 
truth,  the  water  of  life  to  vegetation  in  the  valleys.    Prior  to  the  introduction 


121 


of  irrigation  many  parts  of  the  plains  of  the  San  Joaquin  were  barren  wastes. 
There  is  no  article  of  food  for  either  man  or  beast  which  can  be  raised  with- 
out irrigation.  Orans^es,  grapes,  almonds,  wheat,  corn,  alfalfa,  all  live  and 
thrive  by  the  water  from  streams  rising  in  the  mountains.  Farms  or  vineyards 
without  canals  or  ditches  are  unknown,  impossible.  Millions  would  not  have 
been  expended  in  irrigating  canals  if  they  were  unnecessary.  Deprive  that 
country  of  the  waters  of  its  rivers,  and  it  were  as  well  that  the  Pacific  Ocean 
covered  it  a  thousand  fathoms  deep  and  rolled  its  breakers  against  the  rugged 
sides  of  the  Sierras. 

Is  it  beyond  question  that  irrigation  is  a  necessity?  It  is  shown  that  in 
adopting  the  common  law  we  should  cist  aside  every  part  of  that  system 
which  is  unsuited  to  our  necessities  or  inapplicable  to  our  condition.  It  is 
claimed  that  the  English  riparian  principle  does  not  recognize  the  right  to  use 
water  for  irrigation.  This  is  the  very  antipodes  of  the  law  of  appropriation. 
Under  it  the  very  last  owner  at  the  mouth  of  the  stream  is  entitled  to  have  its 
full  flow,  less  what  may  be  applied  to  purely  domestic  uses  by  owners  above 
him.  Each  owner  on  the  stream  has  the  same  right  as  against  those  above 
him.  In  a  word,  riparianism  means  no  irrigation.  It  may  be  assumed  that 
in  some  States  this  principle  has  been  modified  by  the  Courts,  so  as  to  permit 
irrigation,  of  riparian  lands  only,  to  a  limited  extent,  and  should  be  modified 
here.  To  this  the  reply  is  twofold :  First,  that  no  such  modification  could  ap- 
proach the  satisfaction  of  our  necessities;  and  secondly,  we  have  already  done 
far  better;  we  have  adopted  the  policy  of  "first  in  time  first  in  right,"  and  in- 
stead of  restricting  ourselves  to  the  irrigation  of  lands  upon  the  banks  of  riv- 
ers, we  Jiave  gone  back  from  the  banks  to  wherever  water  could  be  most  suc- 
cessfully and  profitably  utilized,  and  we  have  now  in  view  such  proper  regu- 
lations of  the  use  of  water  as  shall  realize  the  greatest  attainable  productive- 
ness with  the  least  possible  waste. 

The  customs  and  usages  in  regard  to  water  rights  were  very  early  adopted 
by  our  Courts,  and  thus  became  a  part  of  our  common  law.  The  law  of  ap- 
propriation took  its  oriqin  in  necessity.  It  sprang  up  regardless  of  the  owner' 
ship  of  lands  upon  river  banks.  It  would  have  come  into  existence  notwith- 
standing the  opposition  of  such  owners.  This  necessity,  which  is  now  and 
always  has  been  the  foundation  of  the  law  of  prior  appropriation,  was  not 
changed  by  the  purchase  of  the  river  banks  from  the  Government  by  private  indi- 
viduals. The  law  of  appropriation  has  been  universally  supposed  to  be  the 
paramount  Iftw,  and  rights  acquired  under  not  to  be  hampered  by  privileges 
existing  in  a  riparian  owner.  For  nearly  thirty  years  the  decisions  of  the 
Supreme  Court  have  been  uniform  in  recognizing  and  maintaining  such  rigjits 
as  absolute,  and  during  that  time  that  Court  has  never  decided  in  favor  of  a 
riparian  owner  against  an  appropriator. 

The  law. of  appropriation,  as  it  exists  in  the  unwritten  law  of  custom, 
usage  and  judicial  decision,  should  have  its  place  in  our  statute  books  in  such 
form  and  with  such  unmistakable  plainness  that  no  riparian  owner  can  be 
heard  objecting  to  legislation  upon  irrigation. 


122 


This  is  not  merely  a  controversy  between  irrigators  and  riparianists  as  to 
who  shall  have  the  water.  It  is  either  in-igation  or  desolation.  To  sustain 
riparianism  is  to  abolish  irrigation  completely.  To  declare  for  appropriation 
is  to  give  the  State  incalculable  benefits  which  will  be  derived  from  the 
utilization  of  all  our  waters  for  irrigation. 

Where  does  San  Francisco  stand  with  relation  to  this  question?  She 
should  be  in  the  foremost  rank  of  the  appropriators.  The  wealth  of  the 
agricultural  reso^irces  of  the  State  are  year  by  year  pouring  into  her  lap- 
Will  she  sit  idly  by  and  be  robbed  of  one-half  of  her  earnings?  Is  there  any 
future  prosperity  for  a  seaport  on  the  margin  of  a  desert?  Have  railroads 
been  built,  steamship  lines  organized,  transportation  facilities  in  every  way 
from  this  city  south  and  immigration  encouraged  for  nothing?  No  sane 
man  doubts  that  but  for  the  population  an  productiveness  of  the  interior  of 
the  State  this  city  would  be  a  village.  Allow  the  riparian  wolves  to  destroy 
the  south  and  then  measure  your  commerce.  Every  business  interest  her© 
should  hasten  to  speak  loud  for  appropriation  and  irrigation.  X. 


Alta  California. 

A  Killin£f  Amendment. 

Of  the  irrigation  bills  under  consideration  in  the  Legislature,  the  first 
in  natural  order  has  been  the  '*  Wigginton  bill."  This  is  the  bill  which,  if 
passed,  effectually  squelches  any  further  handicapping  of  irrigation.  After 
adding  to  the  Civil  Code  the  new  sections  proposed  by  this  bill,  and  repeal- 
ing the  obnoxious  riparian  Section  1422,  a  basis  will  have  been  laid  for 
further  legislation.  Under  the  false  pretense  of  justice  to  all,  amendments 
have  been  offered  in  the  Senate  to  the  effect  that  "the  right  of  riparian  pro- 
prietors to  the  use  of  water  in  running  streams  for  actual  family  and  domes- 
tic use,  and  for  the  irrigation  of  land  where  practicable,  and  for  the  watering 
of  cattle  and  other  stock  of  said  proprietor,  shall  not  be  impaired  by  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act." 

This  would  change  the  whole  force  and  effect  of  the  bill  from  its  orignal 
purpose,  which  is  to  foster  and  encourage  irrigation,  into  a  mere  re-enact- 
ment of  the  Enghsh  riparian  law,  with  the  additional  privilege  to  the  ripar- 
ian owner  which  the  common  law  does  not  confer,  that  is,  "  the  irrigation 
of  land  where  practicable."  This  is.  a  barren  privilege,  however,  for  under 
the  law  of  England  a  riparian  owner  cannot  irrigate,  and,  according  to  the 
loudly-repeated  vociferations  of  the  riparianist,  we  cannot  modify  the  English 
doctrine.  So  we  must  leave  out  the  question  of  irrigation  by  a  riparian 
owner  entirely  in  considering  the  proposed  amendment.  But  it  is  urged, 
and  may  seem  just  to  those  who  may  be  ignorant  of  the  physical  condition 
of  most  of  the  streams  from  which  water  is  diverted  for  irrigation,  that  the 
diversion  of  water  for  irrigation  should  not  be  so  great  as  to  deprive  the 
owner  of  the  banks  of  water  for  actual  family  and  domestic  use,  and  for  the 
watering  of  cattle  and  stock.     None  know  better  than  the  three  firms  of 


123 


-cattle-dealers  who  comprise  the  riparian  army,  that  the  effect  of  this  amend- 
ment would  be  a  prohibition  against  the  use  of  the  rivers  of  the  Great 
Southern  Valley  for  any  purpose  except  the  overflowing  of  their  swamps. 
The  rivers  in  that  section  derive  their  waters  from  the  melting  snows  of  the 
Sierras.  Many  of  them  run  dry  during  the  lust  of  the  summer,  and  then, 
gradually  increasing  in  flow,  send  down  immense  volumes  of  water  in  the 
winter  and  spring.  At  the  higher  stages  of  water  there  is  enough  for  all. 
As  the  streams  begin  to  fall,  and  the  irrigation  season  sets  in,  the  amount  of 
water  diminishes  to  such  an  extent  that  before  reaching  the  swamps  upon 
which  they  overflow,  the  water  sinks  in  the  beds  and  totally  disappears.  A 
stream  which  may  be  a  swollen  torrent  as  it  leaves  the  mountains,  becomes 
less  by  degrees  as  it  advances  in  its  course  across  the  plains,  until  finally  no 
vestige  of  moisture  remains. 

If  this  water  thus  wasted  is  applied  to  irrigation,  it  will  be  the  farmers' 
salvation.  Take  a  map  of  the  State  and  look  at  Kings  Kiver,  Kern  River 
and  others.  They  course  for  forty,  fifty  and  sixty  miles  from  the  moun- 
tains before  finally  sinking.  Who  is  injured  if  in  that  course  the  water  is 
diverted?  The  water  is  unfit  for  domestic  purposes.  It  breeds  fever  in 
oattle;  it  settles  in  stagnant  pools  and  poisons  the  atmosphere  for  man  and 
beast.  The  natural  laws  of  necessity  demand  that  if  there  are  uses  to  which 
this  water  can  be  put,  not  to  be  supplied  by  any  other  means,  and  other  uses 
which  can  be  satisfied  from  other  sources,  the  former  class  of  use  should 
have  the  better  right  and  the  latter  compelled  to  resort  to  other  devices.  The 
cattlemen  must  yield  to  this  necessity  and  obtain  their  water  supply  from 
the  abundant  underground  resources  of  the  great  valley  by  means  of  wells. 
They  not  only  know  this,  but  they  have  actually  availed  themselves  of  the 
knowledge.  They  are  wilfully  false  in  pleading  that  river  water  is  necessary 
for  their  stock  or  for  their  domestic  purposes.  They  have  been  engaged  in 
a  systematic  effort  to  befog,  bewilder  and  deceive  the  Legislature  as  to  their 
legal  rights,  and  as  to  the  facts  of  the  controversy  between  themselves  and 
irrigators.  Under  the  condamnation  section  of  the  bill,  the  irrigators  will 
have  to  pay  for  wells  enough  to  give  them  water  for  all  domestic  purposes 
And  for  watering  cattle.  What^can  they  ask  more?  This  proposed  amend- 
ment is  equivalent  to  striking  out  the  enacting  clause.  Any  Senator  who 
wishes  to  see  irrigation  buried  fathoms  deep  will  vote  for  it.  No  man  can 
befuddle  the  irrigators  into  believing  the  amendment  is  offered  or  supported 
for  any  purpose  than  to  kill  the  bill,  and  they  will  treat  its  supporters 
accordingly. 


Alta  California. 

La^v  and  Irri^ration— Flexibility  and  Reasonableness  of  the  Common 
Ija-«v  Wben  Intelli^^ently   Construed. 

Irrigation  was  not  a  necessity  where  the  common  law  had  its  origin. 
Flowing  water  was  first  used  in  England  for  supplying  the  ordinary  wants  of 
men,  including  the  use  of  water  for  domestic  purposes,  and  watering  stock. 


124 


Afterwards,  water  was  used  for  what  was  called  extraordinary  purposes,  such 
as  propelliug  machinery,  for  mauufactures  and  the  like.  -Where  the  civil 
law  prevailed  the  ordinary  use  of  water  included  irrigation.  By  the  common 
law,  according  to  the  weight  of  authority,  a  riparian  proprietor  might  use  all 
the  water  of  the  stream  for  ordinary  purposes.  But  his  right  to  the  extraor- 
dinary use  of  water  was  limited  by  like  rights  in  others.  In  France,  Spain, 
Italy,  Mexico  and  other  countries  where  irrigation  is  necessary,  systems  of 
laws  have  been  developed  for  the  economical  distribution  of  flowing  water, 
among  such  landed  proprietors  as  own  lands  so  situated  as  to  be  suscepti- 
ble of  irrigation  by  the  diversion  of  streams.  These  systems  are  the  result 
of  the  experience  of  ages,  moulded  into  laws  by  codes,  edicts  and  customs. 
By  means  of  irrigation,  thus  regulated  by  law,  more  than  one-half  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  world  are  enabled  to  subsist. 

The  common  law  has  not  been  in  force  until  very  recently  where  irrigation 
was  required.  In  no  part  of  the  United  States  is  irrigation  practiced  to  any 
considerable  extent,  except  in  the  territory  acquired  from  Mexico.  No  case 
has  arisen  in  this  State  where  the  fact  that  water  must  be  used  for  irrigation 
has  been  taken  into  consideration  as  a  guide  to  a  proper  decision.  It  has 
been  suggested  that,  inasmuch  as  convenient  laws  for  economical  irrigation 
exist  only  in  counties  where  arbitrary  rule  prevails,  that  no  effective  system 
can  be  devised  or  executed  in  a  free  government  controlled  by  the  common 
law.  This  suggestion  comes  from  a  total  misconception  of  the  principles  of 
the  common  law.  It  is  the  elasticity  and  adaptability  of  the  common  law  to 
all  new  changes  in  the  circumstances  and  conditions  of  civilized  man  that 
constitutes  its  superiority  over  arbitrary  codes. 

LEADING  LIGHTS  OF  THE  LAW. 

Chancellor  Kent  tells  us: 

•'  A  great  proportion  of  the  rules  and  maxims  which  constitute  the  immense 
Codes  of  the  common  law,  grew  into  use  by  gradual  adoption,  and  received 
from  time  to  time  the  sanction  of  the  Courts  of  Justice,  without  any  legisla- 
tive Act  or  interference.  It  was  the  application  of  the  dictates  of  natural 
justice  and  of  cultivated  reason  to  particular  cases.  In  the  just  language  of 
Sir  Matthew  Hale,  the  common  law  of  England  is  •  not  the  product  of  the 
wisdom  of  some  one  man,  or  society  of  men,  in  any  one  age,  but  of  the  wis- 
dom, counsel,  experience  and  observation  of  many  ages  of  wise  and  observing 
men.'  And  his  further  remarks  on  this  subject  would  be  well  worthy  the 
consideration  of  those  bold  projectors  who  can  think  of  striking  off  a  perfect 
code  of  law  at  a  single  essay;  '  Where  the  subject  of  any  law  is  single,  the 
prudence  of  one  age  may  go  far  at  one  essay  to  provide  a  fit  law;  and  yet, 
even  in  the  wisest  provisions  of  that  kind,  experience  shows  us  that  new  and 
tinthought  of  emergencies  often  happen  that  necessarily  require  new  supple- 
ments, abatements,  or  explanations.  But  a  body  of  laws  that  concern  the 
common  justice,  applicable  to  a  great  kingdom,  is  vast  and  comprehensive;, 
consists  of  infinite  particulars,  and  must  meet  with  various  emergencies,  and 


125 


therefore  requires  much  time  and  much  experience,  as  well  as  much  wisdom 
and  prudence,  succes.sively  to  discover  defects  and  inconveniences,  and  to 
apply  apt  supplements  and  remedies  for  them;  and  such  are  the  common 
laws  of  England,  namely,  the  productions  of  much  wisdom,  time  and  expe- 
rience,'" 

Professor  Pomeroy's  excellent  work  on  municipal  law  was  written  while 
he  was  uninfluenced  by  any  local  surroundings,  and  his  graphic  description 
of  the  principles  of  the  common  law,  written  under  such  circumstances,  will 
be  read  with  interest.     He  said: 

"  The  underwritten  law,  by  its  very  process  of  becoming  law,  is  continu- 
allyjrejecting  what  has  outgrown,  and  stating  new  rules  to  apply  to  the  relations 
which  are  constantly  arising.  It  pushes  out  its  advances  in  every  direction. 
If  the  enterprise  of  any  portion  of  the  citizens  has  opened  new  channels  of 
trade  and  business,  it  anticipates  the  legislature,  and  is  immediately  at  hand 
to  define  and  establish  the  new  rights  and  duties  which  may  spring  from  the 
untried  field  of  activity.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  this  power  of  the  law  of 
judicial  decision  is  one  or  great  importance,  and  that  it  gives  the  system  a 
decided  superiority  over  the  other  as  a  practical  instrument  for  adjusting  the 
private  relations  of  the  people  of  a  State.  The  fourth  requisite  of  a  perfect 
municipal  law  is,  that  its  rules,  as  they  exist  at  any  given  date,  should  be 
flexible,  and  should  embrace  the  power  of  admitting  exceptions  to  their  general 
acquirements,  so  that,  when  a  case  does  not  fall  within  the  reason,  although 
it  may  within  the  letter  of  a  regulation,  it  shall  not  be  controlled  by  it,  con- 
trary to  right  and  equity.  Every  National  jurisprudence  should  aim  at  pro- 
moting justice;  the  nearer  that  it  approaches  to  the  teachings  of  conscience 
and  the  morality  of  Christianity  the  nearer  it  is  to  an  ideal  legislation.  The 
contrast  between  the  statutory  code  and  the  free  law  of  judicial  decision  in 
this  faculty  of  doing  right  by  adaptation  to  the  difl'erent  circumstances  is 
striking  and  exhibits  in  a  clear  light  the  superiority  of  the  latter  system.  The 
one  is  rigid  and  inflexible  in  its  rules;  they  may  be  repealed  by  Legislatures, 
but  while  they  last  they  admit  of  no  exceptions.  The  very  nature  of  a  statute, 
as  the  expression  of  the  supreme  will  of  the  State,  allows  of  no  interference 
with  its  provisions  by  the  courts  or  other  departments  of  the  Government. 
It  may  require  judicial  construction  to  arrive  at  the  meaning  of  particular 
enactments;  but  this  once  ascertained,  they  must  be  implicitly  followed. 
Were  the  judges  permitted  to  bend  the  statutory  rules  to  meet  the  exigencies 
of  individual  cases,  and  thus  promote  substantial  justice,  their  essential  char- 
acter would  be  lost;  they  would  become  part  and  parcel  of  the  unwritten 
law." 

COMMON   LAW  AND  IRRIGATION. 

Why  may  not  the  principles  of  the  common  law,  as  described  by  these 
learned  authors,  be  invoked  for  the  formation  of  rules  and  regulations  by  the 
courts  for  the  distribution  of  water  for  irrigation?  Shall  it  be  said  that  the 
common  law  cannot  survive  a  drouth,  and  that  it  be  enforced  in  an  arid 
country  the  inhabitants  must  perish?    Does  not  nature,  the  parent  of  the 


126 


common  law,  exist  in  all  climates,  both  wet  and  dry?  Why  may  not  the  dic- 
tates of  natural  justice  and  of  "cultivated  reason"  be  applied  in  a  desert  as 
well  as  in  a  swamp?  Why  may  not  the  courts  say  that  in  a  country  where 
liuman  life  can  only  be  sustained  by  irrigation,  that  water  for  irrigation  is  a 
natural  right  and  its  use  for  such  a  purpose  is  an  ordinary  use?  Why  may 
not  the  courts  hold  that  each  land-owner  over  whose  land  water  can  be  made 
to  flow,  in  a  desert,  has  an  equal  and  common  right  with  all  others  similarly 
situated  to  the  use  of  such  water?  Why  may  not  the  courts  apply  the  well- 
known  rule  of  the  common  law  to  this  ordinary  use  of  water,  and  class  it  with 
the  use  of  water  for  domestic  purposes,  and  give  to  the  first  appropriator  so 
much  water  as  is  absolutely  necessary  for  the  natural  want  of  irrigation?  If 
the  principles  of  the  common  law  are  inconsistent  with  an  economical  and 
convenient  system  of  irrigatiou,  because  irrigation  was  not  generally  prac- 
ticed in  England,  it  will  be  the  first  time  the  common  law  has  failed  because 
new  conditions  have  arisen.  If  the  common  law  is  not  elastic,  how  did  the 
Federal  Courts  acquire  maritime  jurisdiction  over  the  great  lakes  and  rivers 
of  the  United  States,  when  by  all  English  authorities  that  jurisdiction  was 
confined  to  where  the  tide  ebbs  and  flows?  Why  do  the  Courts  of  this  country 
deny  the  common  law  doctrine  that  light  and  air  will  pass  by  deed  as  an  ap- 
purtenant to  a  house  having  windows,  if  English  precedents,  however  absurd, 
must  be  enforced  in  this  country?  Why  did  the  Supreme  Court  of  this  State 
refuse  to  enforce  the  common  law  rule  in  regard  to  fencing  in  one's  cattle,  if 
it  had  no  power  to  reject  common  law  rules  which  were  repugnant  to  our  cus- 
toms? If  the  common  law  is  so  absolute  and  arbitrary  as  to  require  the 
abandonment  of  one-half  of  California,  because  water  cannot  be  used  for  ir- 
rigation, why  have  we  in  our  common  law  books  more  than 

THBEE   THOUSAND   OVEERULED   CASES? 

If  one  decision  in  regard  to  water,  rendered  a  hundred  years  ago,  must  be 
precedent  for  all  other  cases  wherein  the  use  of  water  is  involved,  why  have 
■we  in  England  and  the  United  States  hundreds  of  decisions  making  distinc- 
tions and  discriminations  between  different  cases  involving  the  use  of  water? 
If  the  common  law  is  not  elastic,  and  its  principles  adapted  to  the  growth  and 
development  of  a  free  people,  how  does  it  happen  that  the  usages  and  cus- 
toms of  a  rude  people  in  Eugland,  without  manufactories  or  any  of  the  appli- 
ances or  refinements  of  modern  civilization,  have  been  enlarged  and  expanded 
by  the  wisdom  of  learned  Judges,  until  those  customs  and  usages  constitute 
only  small  springs  or  rivulets  at  the  headwaters  of  the  mighty  rivers  of  learn- 
ing and  law,  which  constitute  the  governing  principles  of  all  countries  in 
which  the  English  language  is  spoken?  If  there  is  anything  good  or  wise  in 
the  laws  of  other  countries  on  the  subject  of  irrigation,  why  may  not  our 
Judges  be  guided  by  the  experience  of  such  countries?  Why  may  they  not  fol- 
low the  examples  of  the  great  Judges  of  England,  who,  without  legislation, 
■engrafted  upon  and  adopted,  as  a  part  of  the  common  law,  the  law  merchant 
of  Continental  Europe — the  maritime  law  which  had  been  developed  on  the 
shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  and  the  principles  of  equity  which  had  grown 


127 


and  matured  for  more  than  2,000  years  by  the  learning  and  experience  of  the 
people  of  Rome?  It  ought  not  to  be  difficult  for  the  Courts  of  California  to 
find  precedents  and  good  reasons  to  allow  the  life-giving  element  of  water  to 
fructify  the  fields.  They  ought  to  find  laws  which  will  deny  to  one  selfish 
man  owning  forty  acres  of  swamp  or  marshy  land  on  the  Bay  of  San  Francisco 
the  power  to  deprive  the  people  of  the  great  interior  of  the  State  of  all  means 
of  subsistence  by  denying  them  the  right  of  irrigation. 

WHAT   IS   TO    BE    DONE? 

Unfortunately  the  Courts  hesitate  to  apply  'the  principles  of  the  common 
law  to  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation.  Ruin  threatens  the  State.  What  is  to 
be  done?  Have  we  a  remedy  in  our  form  of  government?  We  answer,  yes. 
The  legislative  department  may  also  make  municipal  laws.  And  from  time 
immemorial,  when  the  Courts  were  unable  to  provide  a  remedy,  or  failed  to 
enforce  the  principles  of  common  law  by  reason  of  technical  bewilderment, 
the  legislative  department  has  furnished  a  remedy.  It  is  gratifying  to  know 
that  in  all  that  portion  of  the  United  States  acquired  from  Mexico,  except 
Nevada  and  California,  the  Legislatures  and  the  Courts  have  operated  in 
harmony  in  establishing  and  enforcing  wise  laws  for  the  regulation  of  irriga- 
tion. We  find  complete  systems  in  existence  in  Colorado,  Wyoming,  Mon- 
tana, Dakota,  New  Mexico,  Idaho,  Utah  and  Arizona.  Some  of  these 
commonwealths  furnished  examples  of  great  wisdom  in  adjusting  the  rights 
of  irrigators.  The  laws  of  Colorado  are  superior  in  effectiveness  and  sim- 
plicity to  any  we  have  been  able  to  find  in  other  countries. 

There  can  be  no  question  of  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  deal  with  this 
subject.  That  power  is  conceded.  Professor  Pomeroy,  in  speaking  of  the 
laws  of  Colorado  and  the  Territories  last  enumerated,  says: 

"  It  is  enough  to  say  that  in  each  of  these  commonwealths  the  statutes 
have  covered  the  whole  ground,  entirely  displacing  common  law  doctrines, 
and  the  labors  of  their  Courts  will  be  confined  to  the  proper  construction  and 
application  of  the  statutory  rules.  Without  attempting  any  further  examina- 
tion of  these  statutes  which  so  completely  displace  the  common  law  doctrine, 
I  shall  confine  myself  to  the  law  concerning  riparian  rights,  riparian  proprie- 
tors and  the  use  of  streams  flowing  through  private  land  in  the  common- 
wealths which  have  not  adopted  these  complete  statutory  systems  and  settled 
all  questions  of  right  by  legislation.  These  commonwealths  are  the  States  of 
California  and  Nevada." 

^  EIPABIAN  BIGHTS  IN   MASSACHUSETTS. 

The  Mill  Acts  of  Massachusetts  and  other  States  made  quite  as  radical 
changes  in  the  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  as  the  bills  now  pending  before 
the  Legislature.  The  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts,  in  an  elaborate  re- 
view of  these  Acts,  among  others,  said : 

"  This  regulation  of  the  rights  of  riparian  proprietors,  both  in  respect  to 
the  stream  and  to  their  adjacent  lands  liable  to  be  affected  by  its  use,  involves 
no  other  governmental  power  than  that  to  make,  ordain  and  establish  whole- 
some and  reasonable  laws,  statutes  and  ordinances  as  the  general  Court  shall 
9 


128 


judge  to  be  for  the  good  and  welfare  of  the  commonwealth,  and  for  the 
government  and  ordering  thereof  and  the  objects  of  the  same.  All  indi- 
vidual rights  of  property  are  held  subject  to  this  power,  which  alone  can 
adjust  their  manifold  relations  and  conflicting  tendencies.  The  absolute 
right  of  an  individual  must  yield  to  and  be  modified  by  corresponding  rights 
in  other  individuals  in  the  community.  The  resulting  general  good 
of  all,  or  the  general  welfare,  is  tue  foundation  upon  which  the  power 
refits,  and  in  behalf  of  which  it  is  exercised.  (Lowell  vs.  Boston,  111 
Mass.,  467.)" 

This  power  to  legislate  for  the  public  good  was  recognized  and  declared  by 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  in  Barbier  vs.  Connolly,  decided  at 
the  October  term,  1884.  In  speaking  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment  to  the 
Constitution,  the  Court  said: 

"  Neither  the  amendment,  broad  and  comprehensive  as  it  is,  nor  any  other 
ameudment,  was  designed  to  interfere  with  the  power  of  the  State,  sometimes 
termed  its  police  power,  to  proscribe  regulations  to  promote  the  wealth, 
peace,  morals,  education  and  good  order  of  the  people,  and  to  legislate 
so  as  to  increase  the  industries  of  the  State,  develop  its  resources  and 
add  to  its  wealth  and  prosperity.  From  the  very  necessity  of  society, 
legislation  of  a  special  character,  having  these  objects  in  view,  must  be 
had  in  certain  districts,  such  as  for  drainage  of  iiiarshes  and  irrigating  arid 
plains." 

Nor  does  it  make  any  difference  as  to  the  right  of  the  State  to  legislate, 
whether  persons  living  upon  the  stream  derived  title  from  the  Mexican 
Government  or  the  United  States.  This  proposition  is  most  clearly  and 
forcibly  demonstrated  by  Professor  Pomeroy  in  an  article  on  that  subject, 
which  is  found  in  the  West  Coast  Reporter.  In  concluding  his  argument,  he 
says: 

"It  seems  plain,  therefore,  that  the  riparian  rights  of  a  private  proprietor, 
holding  by  a  Mexican  grant  duly  confirmed,  are  exactly  the  same,  governed 
by  the  same  rules  as  those  held  by  any  other  private  riparian  proprietor  with- 
in the  State.  The  source  of  its  title  can  make  no  difference  as  to  the  rights 
of  property  which  accompany  and  flow  from  his  ownership!" 

WHAT  POMEEOT  OVEELOOKED. 

But  Professor  Pomeroy,  in  his  series  of  articles  upon  riparian  rights  in 
California,  departed  from  his  usual  liberality  and  candor,  and  took  a  limited, 
narrow  and  technical  view.  He  gave  a  synopsis  of  the  various  Acts  of  Legis- 
latures of  the  Pacific  States  and  Territories.  This  summary  is  substantially 
correct  as  to  all  the  States  and  Territories  except  California.  The  Professor 
either  overlooked  or  neglected  to  mention  any  of  the  legislation  of  this  State, 
except  two  Acts  which  are  printed  in  the  Civil  Code.  It  is  possible  that  the 
Professor  would  not  have  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  irrigation  is  illegal 
in  this  State  if  he  had  read  all  the  Acts  in  relation  thereto.  As  early  as  May  15, 
1854,  the  Legislature  passed  an  Act  providing  for  a  system  of  irrigation  in 
the  counties  of   San   Diego,  San  Bernardino,    Santa  Barbara,    Napa,   Los 


129 


Angeles,  Solano,  Contra  Costa,  Colusa  and  Tulare,  and  provided  for  the 
appointment  of  Commissioners  and  other  officers  to  carry  the  law  into  effect, 
since  which  time  over  fift}'  other  Acts  have  been  passed  on  the  subject  of 
irrigation,  relating  to  the  counties  above  named  and  including  some 
other  sections  of  the  State.  It  seems  strange  that  the  Legislature 
should  pass  fifty  Acts  relating  to  irrigation  without  changing  the  law  on 
that  subject. 

The  claims  of  elasticity  and  adaptability  of  the  common  law  must  be  aban- 
doned if  a  decision  as  to  the  right  to  the  use  of  water  rendered  in  England 
a  hundred  years  ago  is  the  law  of  California,  notwithstanding  it  denies  to 
the  people  the  right  of  irrigation,  and  is  in  direct  conflict  with  the 
Legislature  of  the  State.  If  the  Courts  must  so  construe  the  common  law 
as  to  make  prosperity  in  California  impossible,  it  is  time  the  Legislature  de- 
prived them  of  such  an  engine  of  mischief  by  repealing  the  law  adopting 
such  a  system. 

Let  the  Legislature  try  once  more.  Let  it  declare  in  terms  that  cannot  be 
misunderstood  that  California  will  not  let  her  rivers  run  to  waste  into  the 
ocean.  That  right  to  deprive  the  people  of  the  use  of  our  rivers  does  not 
exist  in  any  set  of  men,  however  selfish  they  may  be.  All  people  in  the 
irrigating  sections  of  the  State  are  proprietors.  The  so-called  riparian 
proprietors  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  have  no  use  for  the  water  in  its 
original  channel,' but  desire  to  levy  tribute  upon  those  who  have  appropri- 
ated it! 

It  may  as  well  be  understood  that  the  people  of  California  are  inter- 
ested in  the  development  of  the  State,  and  that  they  will  have  such 
laws,  either  from  the  Courts  or  the  Legislature,  as  will  enable  them  to  utilize 
the  resources  of  California.  Let  him  who  stands  in  the  way  of  this  move- 
ment beware. 


Modesto  Evening  News. 

Sacramento  Iietter. 

Sacramento,  February  21,  1885. 
Editor  Evening  News— /SeV.-  The  great  question  before  the  Legislature  at 
this  time  is  that  of  irrigation.  It  is  the  question  above  all  others  that 
excites  the  attention  of  the  people  of  the  State,  and  yet  there  are  but  few 
•who  understand  the  position  of  many  of  the  legislators  on  this  subject.  As 
a  fact,  about  two- thirds  of  the  Assembly  are  for  irrigation;  but  it  is  hard  to 
say  how  the  Senate  stands.  There  are  two  widely  separated  and  distinct 
classes  of  people  to  this  fight,  viz:  The  irrigators  and  the  riparian  owners. 
Some  seem  to  think  that  the  irrigators  are  trying  to  have  the  Legislature 
take  away  the  rights  of  riparian  owners,  but  this  is  all  bosh — no  Legislature 
can  take  away  the  property  rights  of  an  individual  without  paying  him  for 
such  rights.  The  case  is  simply  this:  Our  Civil  Code  contains  several  pro- 
visions relating  to  "water  rights,"  but  Section  1422  (the  last  section  relating 


130 


to  the  subject)  says:  "  The  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  are  not  affected  by 
the  provisions  of  this  title."  Where  our  law  does  not  cover  a  question,  the 
common  law  rules  of  England  apply.  Now,  the  common  law  holds  that  the 
owner  and  proprietor  of  the  banks  of  a  stream  is  entitled  to  the  flow  of  that 
stream,  and  that  he  has  certain  rights  by  reason  of  being  such  owner.  There- 
fore there  are  riparian  owners  in  this  State,  and  they  have  certain  vested 
rights.  These  rights  exist,  but  under  them  streams  of  water  flow  on  and  on, 
benefiting  a  comparative  few.  There  are  large  tracts  of  land  in  this  State, 
perfect  deserts  in  their  nature,  which,  by  a  little  irrigation,  can  be  turned 
into,  and  in  many  instances  have  been  turned  into  an*earthly  paradise;  lands 
where  thousands  of  homes  are  and  can  be  made,  where  homes  are  clustered 
into  towns,  where  schools  flourish  and  where  business  interests  afford  em- 
ployment to  thousands  of  hands.  It  is  a  question  of  political  economy,  it 
is  a  question  of  expediency,  whether  the  State  should  foster  and  encourage 
the  reclaiming  of  these  desert  lands,  the  reclaiming  and  settling  of  some  of 
which  has  added  millions  of  dollars  to  our  assessment  rolls.  These  lands 
cannot  be  settled  and  these  homes  cannot  be  maintained,  unless  water  can 
be  had  for  irrigation  purposes.  The  water  cannot  be  had,  owing  to  the  rights 
of  the  riparians.  The  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  being  the  guide, 
the  present  Legislature,  in  response  to  popular  demand,  is  undertaking  to 
solve  the  problem,  with  a  view  of  doing  substantial  justice  to  all  parties 
concerned.  It  acknowledges  the  vested  rights  of  riparians,  but,  by  repealing, 
Section  1422  of  the  Civil  Code,  persons  are  prevented  from  acquiring  such 
rights  in  the  future.  It  undertakes  to  set  in  motion  machinery  by  means  of 
which  some  of  the  private  rights  of  riparian  owners  can  be  condemned  and 
turned  over  to  public  use,  after  an  adequate  compensation  therefor.  This 
is  all  there  is  in  the  present  proposed  legislation.  No  one  will  be  damaged 
by  this  at  this  time.  Whoever  has  any  property  or  any  right  of  property 
will  retain  it  or  get  its  value.  H.  R. 


Golton  Semi-Tropic. 

"Water  Jjwluvb  of  California— To  Users  of  Waterin  San  Bernardino  Connty. 

The  undersigned  representatives  of  San  Bernardino  county  to  the  State 
Irrigation  Convention  held  at  Fresno,  commencing  December  3d,  and  con- 
tinuing in  session  for  four  days,  were  members  of  the  legislative  committee 
appointed  by  that  convention  to  represent  the  interests  of  this  section  of  the 
State. 

The  discussion  of  the  irrigation  laws  of  the  State,  as  interpreted  by  the 
Supreme  Court,  develops  a  startling  state  of  affairs,  which  must  be  remedied, 
or  ruin  stares  California  in  the  face.  We  have  confidence  that  the  problem 
will  be  solved,  for  no  people  will  ever  submit  to  be  ruined. 

The  recent  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  celebrated  case  of  Miller 
&  Lux  vs.  Haggin  &  Carr,  taken  up  from  Kern  county,  aflBrms  the  doctrine 
of  riparian  rights  to  an  extent  which  would  permit  a  landowner  near  the 


131 


Santa  Ana  river,  below  Anaheim  and  Santa  Ana,  to  get  an  injunction  from 
the  courts  compelling  every  user  of  water  and  every  company  taking  water 
from  the  Santa  Ana  river  or  its  tributaries  to  turn  every  drop  of  water  back 
into  the  river,  whether  such  water  would  ever  reach  the  land  of  the  applicant 
or  not,  or  whether  or  not  he  desired  to  use  the  water  when  it  did  reach  him. 
Thus  the  North  Fork  ditch,  the  South  Fork  ditch,  the  Redlands  Water  Com- 
pany, the  Mill  Creek  ditch,  the  Meeks  &  Dale}-,  the  Riverside  canals,  the 
Yorba  ditch,  the  Semi-Tropic  ditch  (irrigating  Orange,  Tustin  City,  and  Santa 
Ana),  the  Anaheim  ditch  and  Cajon  ditch,  would  all  be  compelled  to  turn 
their  water  back  into  the  river — no  matter  how  long  they  had  used  it — and 
Highlands,  Lugonia,  Redlands,  Crafton,  Old  San  Bernardino,  Colton,  River- 
side, Yorba  settlement,  Orange,  Santa  Ana,  Tustin  City,  Placentia  and  Ana- 
heim would  all  lapse  back  into  desert  wastes,  and  fifty  millions  or  more  of 
property  would  be  destroyed,  if  the  doctrines  of  the  Supreme  Court  were 
carried  out  and  there  was  no  legislation  to  remedy  the  evil. 

To  say  that  this  is  an  alarming  state  of  affairs  is  putting  the  statement  in  a 
very  mild  form.  There  are  two  methods  of  obtaining  a  redress  of  grievances: 
First,  by  getting  the  Supreme  Court  to  reverse  its  own  decision  (and  a  re- 
hearing has  already  been  granted),  and  secondly,  failing  in  this,  to  get 
legislation  that  will  allow  appropriators  to  condemn  riparian  claims  and  take 
the  water  for  a  public  use. 

There  is  no  question  but  the  desired  end  can  be  reached  one  way  or  the 
other.  The  most  satisfactory  remedy  would  be  a  modification  or  reversal  of 
the  Supreme  Court  decision;  but,  failing  in  this,  legislation  can  and  must  be 
obtained. 

If  this  evil  cannot  be  remedied  we  shall  have  no  use  for  an  Immigration 
Association;  but  an  emigration  association  will  be  necessary  to  help  people 
out  of  a  country  where  it  is  impossible  for  them  to  obtain  a  livelihood. 

Already  most  of  the  canal  companies  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley  are  under 
injunction  to  turn  the  waters  back  into  the  streams.  In  one  instance  the 
people  took  forcible  possession  of  the  canals  and  defied  the  courts.  In 
another  the  waters  were  all  turned  back  into  the  stream  and  for  three  months 
in  midsummer  ran  to  waste  in  the  sands  of  the  river  bed,  doing  no  one  any 
good,  even  to  the  extent  of  never  reaching  the  riparian  claimant  who  de- 
manded the  waters. 

To  do  this  work  money  will  be  needed.  The  committee  on  legislation  at 
Fresno  last  week  resolved  to  raise  $5,000,  two-fifths  of  which  amount  was  to 
be  called  for  at  once,  and  the  balance  as  it  might  be  needed.  It  is  possible 
that  even  a  larger  sum  of  money  may  be  needed  before  the  question  is  set- 
tled. 

San  Bernardino  County  has  been  assessed  $500,  which  sum  the  represen- 
tatives from  this  county  pledged  should  be  forthcoming,  and  all  water 
companies,  land  owners  and  citizens  generally  should  at  once  respond  by 
placing  themselves  in  communication  with  John  C.  North  of  Riverside,  who 
represents  this  county  on  the  finance  committee. 


132 


Every  man  of  influence  in  San  Bernardino  county  and   throughout  the 
State  should  at  once  exercise  that  influence  in  a  manner  that  will  help  the 
cause  of  the  people. 
There  is  no  time  to  lose.     What  we  want  is  prompt  and  decisive  action, 

John  G.  North, 
S.  C.  Evans, 
L.  M.  Holt, 
Members  of  the  Legislative  Committee  from  San  Bernardino  county. 


San  Francisco  Weekly  Star. 

Irrig^ation. 

A  lar^e  part  of  California  can  only  be  cultivated  by  moans  of  artificial  sav- 
ing and  distribution  of  the  natural  streams  of  water.  What  is  the  conse- 
quence ?  Of  course  that  monopolists  have  bought  up  the  land  next  the 
streams,  and  propose  to  hold  and  sell  the  water  at  their  own  rates  to  every- 
body else.  If  it  were  possible  to  get  all  the  air  into  one  bag  and  all  the  sun- 
light into  another,  the  monopolists  would  certainly  do  it,  and  would  then 
put  their  own  prices  on  the  means  of  breathing  and  seeing.  Why  shouldn't 
they?  "  The  earth  is  the  (land)  lord's  and  the  fullness  thereof  "—says  their 
Bible.  They  have  pretty  much  got  the  public  lands  already.  They  are  at 
this  moment  engrossing  the  water.  If  they  do  not  monopolize  air  and  light, 
it  is  solely  because  they  can't.    They  wish  they  could. 

The  common  sense  principle  at  the  basis  of  this  irrigation  matter  is  per- 
fectly plain.  Wherever  irrigation  is  necessary  for  agriculture,  the  use  of 
water  should  be  controlled  by  government  for  the  equal  benefit  of  all  land 
owners.  Our  monopolist  partisan  Legislature  has  before  it  a  number  of  bills 
on  the  subject,  and  there  has  been  some  voting  backwards  and  forwards  about 
it  in  an  aimless  way.  The  name  thus  far  applied  to  the  parties  in  interest  is, 
riparians  {i.  e.  riversiders)  for  the  monopolists  who  have  been  undertaking 
to  buy  up  and  monopolize  the  streams,  and  irrigationists,  for  those  who  want 
a  just  and  equal  system  for  using  water.  Now,  the  riparians,  being  on  the 
wrong  side,  have  a  good  organization  in  the  Legislature  and  thus  far  have 
prevented  anything  from  being  done;  while  the  irrigationists  have  acted  just 
as  folks  who  are  in  the  right  are  very  often  fools  enough  to  do — they  have  not 
organized  nor  planned,  and  they  haven't  carried  a  point.  What  a  fool  a  man 
is,  who  thinks  that  the  right  side  will  win  by  itself !  The  fact  is  exactly  the 
other  way.  The  right  side  needs  the  utmost  help  because  men  in  the  wrong 
work  like  devils. 

We  have  not  the  remotest  idea  that  a  good  irrigation  law  will  be  passed 
this  session.  But  if  the  irrigationists  have  the  ordinary  common  sense  to  fix 
upon  a  good  plan  of  operations,  to  form  an  organization,  and  to  push  their 
good  plan,  they  can  carry  their  good  plan— if  not  this  session,  then  next 
session.  Two  years  seems  a  good  while  to  wait,  it  is  true;  but  two  years  is  & 
very  short  time  in  which  to  carry  an  important  public  measure. 


Napa  Daily  Register. 

Riparianism. 

While  there  are  those  inside  and  outside  of  our  Legislature  who  are  trying 
to  adapt  the  old  riparian  law  of  England  to  California,  or  California  to  Eng- 
land's riparian  law,  the  S.  F.  Post  thus  pointedly  dissects  the  subject: 

"The  body  politic  is  now  sorely  afflicted  with  a  disease  called  'riparianism.' 
The  germ  of  the  disease  was  brought  into  the  State  with  the  common  law  of 
England.  It  was  supposed  until  lately  that,  after  treatment  for  a  generation 
by  our  doctors  of  the  law,  the  affliction  had  been  eradicated  from  our  political 
system,  never  to  reappear.  But- the  present  Supreme  Court  has  brought  it  to 
the  surface,  and  now  the  malady  has  taken  such  form  that  nothing  short  of 
radical  treatment  will  be  efficacious. 

"The  diagnosis  of  the  case  in  a  nutshell  is  this  :  When  we  organized  as 
one  of  the  Federal  Union  we  adopted  the  common  law  as  the  general  system 
which  should  be  the  rule  of  decision  in  our  Courts.  The  people  began  the 
development  of  the  two  great  industries  of  the  State — mining  and  farming. 
They  early  found  that  mines  and  farms  in  many  portions  of  the  State  must  be 
located  more  or  less  remote  from  the  streams,  Water  was  a  necessity  for 
both,  and  not  being  able  to  move  either  farm  or  mine  to  the  stream,  the  water 
was  taken  out  in  ditches  and  canals  to  wash  the  gold-bearing  earth  and  irrigate 
the  fertile  soil.  It  never  occurred  to  the  hardy  miner  or  the  toiling  farmer 
to  send  over  to  England  for  a  copy  of  1  Sim.  and  Stuart,  where  he  would  have 
found,  in  the  case  of  Wright  vs.  Howard,  the  language  of  Sir  John  Leach: 
'Aqua  curis  et  debet  currere  ut  currere  solebat, '  the  riparian  law  of  England.  As 
time  passed,  farms  and  farmers  multiplied.  The  farmers  trod  the  path  of 
those  before  them,  and  diverted  the  waters  of  streams  for  irrigation  when- 
ever necessary.  No  one  needs  to  be  told  to  what  magnitude  the  irrigation 
interests  have  grown.  It  is  enough  to  say  that  nearly  every  man,  woman 
and  child  in  the  State  is  more  or  less  interested  in  irrigation,  directly  or  in- 
directly. However,  after  irrigating  for  thirty-five  years,  the  farmer  awoke 
one  day  to  the  fact  that  the  Supreme  Court,  which  they  had  helped  to  choose, 
had  procured  a  copy  of  1  Sim.  and  Stuart,  and  translated  the  Latin  of  the 
common  law,  and  that  the  plain  English  of  it  is  that  irrigation  is  against  the 
law,  and  the  irrigator  is  a  wrong-doer." 

Assembly  Bill  No.  410,  intended  to  legalize  irrigation,  was  passed  last  week 
by  a  vote  of  50  to  16  in  the  House,  our  member.  H.  A.  Pellett,  voting  right 
by  voting  in  the  affirmative.  The  fate  of  a  similar  bill  in  the  Senate  is  yet  to 
be  decided. 


Fresno  Republican. 

"The  Convention. 

The  State  Irrigation  Convention,  which  concluded  a  session  of  four  days  in 
Fresno  on  last  Saturday,  we  believe  will  accomplish  the  purpose  for  which  it 
was  held.    It  is  true  that  it  but  commences  the  great  work  that  is  to  be  done, 


134 


but  there  is  no  small  advantage  in  starting  right,  and  this,  in  our  opinion, 
the  convention  has  done.  As  was  hoped  and  intended  that  it  should  be,  the 
convention  was  composed  of  representative  men  from  all  parts  of  the  State 
where  irrigation  exists,  and  also  from  many  parts  where  there  is  an  awaken- 
ing interest  in  the  matter  so  important  to  the  general  welfare  of  the  State* 
Intelligent  and  far-seeing  men  from  sections  where  there  are  at  present  no 
irrigation  interests,  but  in  which  exist  the  natural  resources  for  grand  possi- 
bilities when  the  people  have  learned  to  utilize  the  waters  of  our  streams, 
were  present  and  engaged  in  earnest  counsel  with  thosa  who  have  studied 
the  question  more  carefully  and  had  the  benefit  of  practical  experience. 

The  proceedings  of  the  first  two  days  of  the  convention  were  not  calcu- 
lated to  inspire  the  hope  that  the  conflicting  views  of  the  members  could  be 
so  harmonized  as  to  bring  about  the  unanimity  of  opinion  so  much  desired 
as  to  the  manner  of  adjustment  of  existing  difficulties.  There  were  many  in 
the  convention  who  evidently  came  simply  as  the  representatives  of  some  ex- 
isting right,  either  of  riparian  ownership  or  appropriation,  who  had  only  in 
view  private  interests  or  that  of  some  particular  locality,  and  the  main  ques- 
tions were  frequently  lost  sight  of,  and  it  was  only  after  long  and  patient 
discussion  that  these  parties  could  be  brought  to  see  that  a  law  is  to  be  framed 
to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  State  and  not  of  some  particular  individual, 
corporation  or  community.  Among  the  first  to  address  the  convention  were 
also  a  number  of  speakers  who  hold,  or  pretend  to  hold,  the  opinion  that  no 
legislation  is  necessary,  and  that  the  courts  will  construe  the  present  law  so 
that  irrigation  may  not  only  exist  but  flourish  under  its  provisions.  It  is 
doubtless  to  the  credit  of  the  convention  that  all  speakers  were  given  a  re- 
spectful hearing,  but  it  would  most  certainly  have  been  to  the  advantage  of 
all  had  less  valuable  time  been  consumed  by  those  entertaining  this  opinion. 
Even  if  the  courts  finally  decide  in  favor  of  irrigation,  but  few  acquainted 
with  the  subject  will  deny  that  some  additional  legislation  is  needed  under 
which  to  build  up  a  satisfactory  system  of  irrigation  in  California. 

The  Legislative  Committee  labored  assiduously  for  more  than  two  days  to 
draft  the  principles  which  it  deemed  necessary  to  be  embodied  in  a  bill  to  be 
presented  to  the  Legislature.  It  is  well  that  the  committee  acted  with  so 
much  deliberation  and  care,  as  it  undoubtedly  resulted  in  the  wisest  action 
possible  on  its  part,  and  also  gave  the  convention  time  to  pass  through  its 
frothy  stages  and  be  prepared  to  receive  and  consider  the  report  in  the  spirit 
in  which  it  was  made,  and  with  a  view  to  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest 
number,  and  not  to  the  interest  of  individuals  and  sections. 

The  report  of  the  committee,  briefly  summarized,  recites  that  the  waters  of 
the  natural  streams  and  lakes  of  California  belong  to  the  people;  that  for  the 
purpose  of  appropriating  water,  irrigation  districts  may  be  formed,  vested 
with  power  to  assess  the  land  for  the  construction  of  canals  and  other  irriga- 
tion works;  that  the  law  of  Eminent  Domain  be  so  extended  as  to  allow  the 
people  to  condemn  the  rights  of  riparian  owners,  canal  owners  and  appropri- 
ators,  and  pay  for  rights  of  way,  or  whatever  private  or  corporate  property 


135 


may  be  necessary  for  the  successful  appropriation  for  the  use  of  water;  that 
the  old  common  law  of  riparian  rights  does  not  apply  in  this  State;  that  laws 
of  appropriation  be  more  clearly  defined. 

This  is  the  platform  upon  which  the  irrigators  of  California  will  go  before 
the  incoming  Legislature,  and  will  ask  the  adoption  of  these  principles  as  the 
law  of  state.  That  their  adoption  without  a  dissenting  vote  by  a  convention 
so  represeutative  as  that  assembled  at  Fresno  last  week  will  bring  a  strong 
influence  to  bear  on  the  Legislature  there  can  be  no  doubt.  In  that  conven- 
tion were  the  representatives  of  all  the  irrigation  interests  of  the  State,  repre- 
sentatives of  riparian  claimants  and  representatives  of  sections  disinterested 
except  in  the  general  welfare.  Wisdom  and  experience  were  united  in  the 
personel  of  the  committee  which  framed  the  declaration  of  principles,  and  its 
work  was  marked  throughout  by  careful  and  conservative  deliberation. 
That  its  action  was  the  wisest  and  best  that  could  have  been  taken,  the  unani- 
mous approval  of  so  large,  representative  and  intelligent  an  assemblage  as 
that  composing  the  convention  is  the  strongest  possible  proof. 

If  the  action  of  this  convention  were  to  have  no  direct  influence  on  legisla- 
tion, its  effect  on  the  State  at  large  would  more  than  compensate  for  the  time 
and  expense  necessarily  devoted  to  it.  The  greatest  drawback  to  the  advance- 
ment of  irrigation  in  the  past,  and  the  passage  of  laws  that  would  encourage 
and  aid  its  development,  has  been  the  existing  ignorance  concerning  it,  out- 
side of  a  few  irrigated  districts.  This  convention  has  created  a  general  inter- 
est throughout  the  State.  Newspapers  are  discussing  it,  plans  are  forming 
for  irrigation  systems  in  places  where  it  has  hitherto  been  unknown  and 
almost  unthought  of,  and  the  people  of  the  entire  State  are  awakening  to  its 
importance. 

Fresno  Republican. 

Igfnorant  oi  the  Faets. 

The  Chronicle  persists  in  holding  to  a  previous  statement  that  a  majority 
of  the  farmers  and  old  settlers  of  California  are  riparian  owners.  In  its  issue 
of  December  5th,  it  says: 

"  A  country  contemporary  reproves  the  Chronicle  for  saying  that  the  old 
farmers  are  generally  in  favor  of  riparian  rights.  Yet  this  will  be  found  to 
be  the  case.  As  a  rule  the  farms  that  were  laid  out  in  this  State  from  1850  to 
1865  were  located  on  the  borders  of  running  streams.  So  long  as  such  land 
could  be  taken  up  no  one  was  fool  enough  to  locate  at  a  distance  from  water." 

The  Kepublican  is  the  country  contemporary  referred  to,  and  while  it 
makes  no  denial  of  its  bucolic  location,  it  does  most  emphatically  deny  the 
truth  of  the  Chronicle's  statement,  so  far,  at  least,  as  it  applies  to  this  por- 
tion of  the  State. 

Kings  River  is  the  most  important  stream  in  California  from  which  water 
has  been  extensively  diverted  for  irrigation.  From  its  source  in  the  Sierra 
Nevada  to  where  it  empties  into  Tulare  Lake,  there  is  probably  not  160  acres 


136 


of  land  irrigated  by  the  owners  of  small  farms  along  the  stream.  The  blufifs 
of  the  river  rise  abruptly  almost  from  the  water's  edge  to  the  common  level 
of  the  surrounding  country,  and  it  is,  we  believe,  a  demonstrable  fact  that 
water  can  be  brought  from  Kings  River  to  Fresno  (although  the  river  is 
some  eighteen  miles  distant  at  the  nearest  point)  in  a  canal  of  less  length 
than  would  be  required  to  bring  it  to  land  lying  along  the  banks  of  the  river 
at  an  equal  distance  from  the  foot-hills.  From  the  crossing  of  the  Central 
Pacific  railroad  to  the  foot-hills,  a  distance  of  about  twenty  miles,  there  are 
less  than  half  a  dozen  farm  houses  on  Kings  Eiver,  and  with  the  exception  of 
one  or  two  small  orchards  in  the  swampy  bottom  lands  near  the  hills,  there  is 
no  irrigation  w^hatever.  The  banks  of  Kings  River  are  the  most  unproduc- 
tive and  desolate  part  of  the  country.  Those  located  upon  its  banks  can 
only  watch  the  waters  flow  idly  by,  except  the  little  that  may  be  used  for 
stock.  There  were  no  early  settlements  along  its  banks  except  by  those  who 
bought  land  lying  along  the  river  at  a  nominal  price  that  they  might  monopo- 
lize a  vast  stock  range.  Between  the  railroad  crossing  and  the  mouth  of  the 
river  the  banks  are  nearly  all  the  property  of  these  land  monopolists,  who 
own  thousands  of  acres  which  are  used  only  as  a  stock  range.  It  is  from 
these  monopolizing  riparian  owners  that  nearly  all  the  opposition  to  diver- 
sion of  water  has  come.  The  small  owners  along  the  streams  are  almost 
■without  exception  in  favor  of  the  diversion  of  water. 

What  has  been  said  of  the  Kings  River  can  be  said  with  slight  variation  of 
the  San  Joaquin  in  this  county.  There  are  no  settlers  along  its  banks  to 
whom  the  water  is  a  necessity,  or  to  whom  it  is  especially  beneficial  except  for 
stock. 

Farmers  on  the  banks  of  the  streams  enjoy  no  advantage  over  those  on  the 
open  plains,  except  that  their  stock  has  access  to  water  at  the  surface,  while 
their  neighbors  distant  from  the  river  and  irrigating  canals  have  to  draw 
water  from  a  well.  This  is  the  reason  many  of  the  early  settlers  located  on 
the  rivers.  The  bulk  of  the  farming  in  this  county  has  always  been  done  in 
the  foothills  and  on  the  open  plains. 

Our  metropolitan  contemporary  should  endeavor  to  acquire  a  more  accurate 
knowledge  of  existing  conditions  before  passing  judgment  on  a  case  in  which 
so  many  vital  interests  are  involved. 


Santa  Rosa  Democrat. 

The  Irriffation  Q,iiestion. 

The  subject  of  irrigation  is  one  of  the  most  important  that  engages  the  at- 
tention of  the  people  of  California  at  this  time.  More  interest  has  beerr 
manifested  in  it  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State  until  now,  for  the  reason 
that  it  is  of  vital  importance  to  that  section.  Its  prosperity,  indeed  its  very 
existence  as  an  agricultural  and  horticultural  country  depends  upon  it.  There 
is  a  large  area  in  which  crops  cannot  be  raised  without  the  artificial  applica- 
tion of  water.    Northern  California  and  the  coast  counties  are  less  dependent. 


137 


because  the  rainfall  is  greater.  On  the  coast  all  kinds  of  crops  can  be  raised 
from  the  natural  rainfall,  and  in  the  Sacramento  valley  the  cereals  and  fruit 
do  well  frequently,  but  occasionally  there  come  dry  years  in  which  the  crops 
fail.  It  is  well  known  that  crops  will  be  certain  and  the  yield  much  greater 
if  irrigation  were  resorted  to,  and  hence  the  subject  is  exciting  interest  in 
Colusa,  Tehama  and  other  coast  counties. 

The  present  Legislature  will  be  called  upon  to  deal  with  this  question  and 
settle  the  policy  of  the  State  with  regard  thereto.  A  very  important  question 
is  involved.  It  is  whether  the  old  English  law  of  riparian  rights  shall  pre- 
vail, or  whether  the  land- owners  along  the  course  of  the  streams  shall  be 
permitted  to  take  out  and  appropriate  their  waters.  The  importance  of  this 
question  is  illustrated  in  Kern  county.  Kern  valley  is  entirely  dependent 
upon  Kern  river  for  a  supply  of  water  to  fertilize  the  land.  Haggin  &  Carr 
and  other:^  own  the  land  in  the  upper  part  of  the  valley,  while  Miller  &  Lux 
have  a  large  body  of  land  lower  down.  The  land-owners  in  the  upper  part 
of  the  valley,  years  ago,  laid  claim  to  the  waters  of  the  river,  and  made  can- 
als to  divert  and  turn  them  out  upon  their  lands.  A  few  years  ago  Miller  & 
Lux  set  up  a  riparian  claim  to  the  water,  and  denied  the  right  of  those  owning 
land  above  them  to  divert  it  for  irrigating  purposes  until  they  were  supplied 
for  ordinary  purposes.  They  brought  suit  to  prevent  such  diversion,  and 
won  their  case  in  a  recent  decision.  An  appeal  will  be  taken,  and  the  case 
carried  to  the  highest  court  before  it  is  finally  disposed  of.  In  this  case,  if  it 
is  decided  that  riparian  ownership  gives  priority  of  right,  the  better  part  of 
Kern  valley  will  be  converted  back  into  a  desert,  for  there  will  be  no  water 
left  for  anybody  after  Miller  &  Lux  are  supplied,  at  the  season  of  the  year 
when  water  is  absolutely  essential,  for  the  reason  that  Kern  river  runs  over 
a  sandy  bed  and  through  a  sandy  subsoil,  and  the  water  in  the  dry  season 
sinks  and  is  lost,  a  very  small  quantity  reaching  the  lakes  into  which  it  flows^ 
and  some  seasons  none  at  all.  If  the  old  riparian  doctrine  becomes  the  set- 
tled policy  in  California,  a  blow,  almost  fatal,  will  be  struck  at  the  prosperity 
of  Southern  California.  It  applied  well  enough  in  England  where  the  rain- 
fall is  abundant  and  the  use  of  water  is  limited,  but  the  case  is  different  in 
California  and  requires  different  treatment. 

In  Northern  California  another  difficulty  seems  likely  to  arise.  It  is  that 
the  diversion  of  the  waters  of  the  Sacramento  river  will  imperil  its  usefulness 
as  a  navigable  stream.  This  difficulty  has  been  suggested  by  the  Record- 
Union  of  Sacramento,  and  is  under  discussion  by  the  press  at  this  time. 
The  position  assumed  by  the  Sacramento  paper,  if  we  understand  it,  is  that 
apart  from  the  injury  that  would  result  to  navigation,  all  navigable  streams 
are  the  property  of  the  General  Government,  and  the  State  cannot  confer  any 
rights  that  will  impair  their  usefulness. 

Sonoma  county  has  very  little  interest  in  the  controversy  except  as  it  af- 
fects the  general  prosperity  of  the  State.  In  that  particular  it  is  deeply  in- 
terested, and  earnestly  desires  that  there  shall  be  such  a  solution  of  the 
question  as  will  be  best  for  the  people,  and  will  create  millions   of   dollars. 


138 


-worth  of  taxable  property,  aud  thousands  of  happy  homes,  by  the  distribu- 
tion of  water  over  the  largest  area  practicable. 


Alta  California. 

The  Opposition  to  Immigration. 

Upon  a  large  map  of  California  may  be  observed,  near  the  center  of  the 
great  southern  valley,  several  large  swamps  lying  to  the  north  and  the  south 
of  Tulare  Lake,  formed  by  the  overflow  of  Kern  and  Kings  rivers.  The  com- 
bined area  of  these  swamps  is,  some  two  or  three  hundred  thousand  acres. 
The  riparian  owners  upon  the  rivers  above  the  swamps  are  chiefly  farmers, 
•who  have  long  since  appropriated  water  for  irrigation,  under  the  State  com- 
mon law  of  appropriation,  and  who  rely  upon  that  law  for  the  security  of 
their  right.  A  petition  signed  by  a  large  number  of  these  owners  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Senate  yesterday,  asking  for  the  passage  of  the  Fresno  Irri- 
gation Convention  bills.  Such  riparian  owners  as  these  are,  almost  to  a  man, 
opposed  to  establishing  the  English  system  of  riparian  rights.  This  may 
seem  singular  to  one  unacquainted  with  the  nature  of  that  country.  The  ex- 
planation is  simple.  By  his  right  of  appropriation  the  riparian  owner  can 
irrigate;  but  if  his  riparian  right  is  thrust  upon  him  he  cannot  take  water 
from  the  streams,  because  if  he  does  there  will  be  no  water  left  for  the  last 
riparian  owner  at  the  mouth  of  the  stream,  for  either  domestic  purposes  or 
for  watering  cattle,  let  alone  irrigation.  That  this  statement  is  true  can  be 
proved  by  the  testimony  of  every  riparian  owner  in  the  valley. 

The  owners  of  these  swamps  are  almost  alone,  among  the  land  owners  of 
the  State,  in  their  opposition  to  the  proposed  laws  to  perpetuate  appropriation 
and  irrigation.  Their  business  is  cattle  raising.  The  plea  they  make  against 
irrigation  laws  is  that  they  have  vested  rights  as  riparian  owners,  of  which 
the  Legislature  cannot  and  ought  not  deprive  them.  They  claim  that,  if 
nothing  more,  water  should  be  left  them  for  domestic  purposes  and  for  water- 
ing cattle.  jJThe  Legislature  should  treat  this  water  question  as  a  conflict 
between  the  whole  people  on  one  side  and  the  monarchs  of  Kern  and  Kings 
rivers  swamps  on  the  otherJ 

These  swamp  land  owners  are  not  riparian  proprietors.  Both  the  rivers 
mentioned,  when  considered  as  natural  water  courses,  end  where  the  swamps 
begin.  Only  the  owner  of  land  upon  the  banks  of  a  natural  watercourse  is  a 
riparian  proprietor.  Where  there  are  no  banks  there  can  be  no  riparian 
ownership.  When  the  rivers  just  named  reach  the  swamps  they  cease  to  be 
rivers  and  their  banks  disappear.  The  water  spreads  out  over  the  face  of 
the  country  in  all  directions,  without  any  definite  course  or  channel.  It  does 
not  require  a  flood,  reaching  the  mouths  of  the  rivers  where  they  discharge 
into  these  swamps  to  overflow  the  country.  At  the  lowest  stages  of  the  river, 
•whenever  there  is  sufficient  water  so  that  any  amount,  however  small,  flows 
to  the  margin  of  the  swamp,  it  there  loses  itself  in  all  directions.  A  water- 
<Jourse  is  defined  as  a  stream  of  water,  usually  flowing  in  a  definite  channel 


139 


having  a  bed  and  sides  or  banks,  and  usually  discharging  itself  into  some 
other  stream  or  body  of  water;  it  must  be  something  more  than  a  mere  sur- 
face drainage  over  the  entire  face  of  a  tract  of  land.  This  is  an  authorized 
and  well  established  definition,  and  within  it  these  swamp-land  owners  are 
not  riparian  owners,  and  are  not  entitled  to  any  rights  as  such. 

The  claim  made  by  them  that  their  lands  are  naturally  watered  by  the 
overflow  of  the  rivers,  even  if  conceded,  gives  them  no  rights  at  common 
law  or  under  any  law  of  this  State.  They  obtained  title  to  the  land  from  the 
State  for  a  mere  song,  and  then  only  on  condition  that  they  should  reclaim 
the  land.  They  have  never  reclaimed  it.  If  any  partial  reclamation  has 
been  accomplished,  it  has  been  by  the  diversion  of  the  river  waters  above, 
by  third  parties  for  irrigation  purposes.  They  now  ask  this  Legislature  to 
grant  them  rights  which  no  existing  law  gives;  the  right  to  have  forever 
overflowed  lands  which  the  State  gives  them  to  reclaim  from  the  overflow. 
Instead  of  having  any  rights,  their  lands  ought  in  justice  to  be  forfeited  to 
the  State  for  failure  to  comply  with  the  condition.  The  Senate,  which  has 
now  under  consideration  a  proposition  to  give  riparian  owners  the  pre- 
ferred right,  against  irrigators,  to  water  for  domestic  purposes  and  for  cattle, 
must  plainly  see  that  it  is  not  made  in  behalf  of  the  real  riparian  owners,  but 
for  the  sole  benefitof  the  swamp-land  owners;  for  if  under  the  law  the  water 
must  all  flow  to  the  last  riparian  owner  at  the  margin  of  the  swamp,  no  one 
but  the  swamp-land  owner,  who  has  no  riparian  right,  will  get  the  benefit 
of  it. 


Santa  Barbara  Express. 

Water  Rij^bts. 

For  several  weeks  a  fierce  contest  has  been  going  on  at'Sacramento  over  the 
irrigation  problem.  The  lobbies  of  the  Legislature  haveibeen  swarmed  with 
advocates  of  opposing  sides  of  the  great  question — than  which  no  more 
weighty  has  ever  come  before  the  people  of  California.  Our  dispatches  of 
yesterday  state  that  the  Assembly  has  passed  the  series  of  bills  framed  by  the 
Fresno  Convention.  This  will  be  good  news  for  the  people,  and  the  Repub- 
lican party  should  receive  all  credit  for  the  upright  manner  in  which  its 
members  in  the  Assembly  have  worked  and  voted. 


Merced  Express. 

The  members  of  the  Calitornia  Legislature  who  vote  against  the  Irrigation 
bill  now  before  that  body  should  be  placed  upon  the  "black  list,"  and  if  ever 
they  should  poke  their  heads  up  for  office  the  people  should  go  for  their 
scalps.  The  time  is  at  hand  when  the  people  of  the  agricultural  districts  of 
California  demand  and  must  have  suitable  irrigation  laws,  and  those  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  who  oppose  snob  \&ms  are  defying  the  earnest  and  di- 
rect wishes  of  the  people. 


140 
Fresno  Expositor. 

J.  \V.  Shanklin,  once  Surveyor-Geueral  of  this  State,  "hogged"  more 
water  in  Los  Angeles  county  than  he  has  land  to  cover,  or  has  "  hogged  " 
more  laud  than  he  has  water  to  cover,  we  know  not  which,  is  up  at 
Sacramento  *  bellyaching  "  against  the  irrigation  bills.  The  burden  of  his 
song  is  that  the  laws  proposed  don't  fit  his  case.  Shanklin  ought  to  buy  an 
uninhabited  island  and  move  on  it.  Then  he  could  pass  laws  to  suit  his  own 
views. 


Kern  County  Californian. 

Thus  far  all  the  opposition  to  the  irrigntion  measures  has  come  from  three 
men,  Miller  &  Lux  and  Senator  Cox.  While  it  has  been  noisy  and  obstruct- 
ive there  has  been  no  basis  to  it  except  money.  The  open  opposition  of  Cox 
in  the  Senate  has  done  himself  and  his  friends  more  hurt  than  good.  His  argu- 
ment is  that  they  may  hurt  him  to  the  extent  of  a  few  thousand  dollars,  ignor- 
ing the  fact  that  a  way  is  provided  to  make  good  all  his  damage,  and  bring 
upon  him  other  fearful  hardships.  All  he  has  had  to  say,  thus  far,  his  not 
been  of  a  nature  requiring  reply,  and  the  irrigators  sincerely  hope  he  will 
continue  to  occupy  the  floor  as  much  as  possible.  He  deems  it  sufficient  argu- 
ment to  insure  their  defeat  that  they  may  possibly  work  some  injury  to  him- 
self. And  this  is  good  reason  why  half  the  State  should  remain  desert  and 
untold  thousands  of  present  and  future  generations  suffer  poverty,  want,  and 
all  the  attendant  evils. 


Who  Are  They  ? 

The  reports  from  Sacramento  show  that  some  twelve  or  fifteen  Senators 
Are  **  dodging"  the  irrigation  bills  by  refraining  from  voting.  Yet,  when  the 
Heath  amendment  to  reduce  railroad  taxes  was  passed,  every  Senator  was  in 
his  seat  and  voted.  The  passage  of  the  irrigation  bills  is  of  as  much  im- 
portance to  the  people  as  the  adoption  of  the  Heath  amendment  is  to  the 
railroad  company.  Is  the  inference  to  be  drawn  that  the  Senate  believe  in 
making  the  public  interest  subordinate  to  that  of  the  railroad?  Explanations 
seem  to  have  been  the  order  of  the  day  at  the  final  roll-call  upon  the  Heath 
amendment.  Many  Senators  took  occasion  to  explain  their  votes.  It  would 
not  be  entirely  uncalled  for  if  the  Senators  not  voting  upon  the  irrigation 
bills  would  rise  and  explain  their  silence.  There  is  more  or  less  curiosity  to 
know  who  these  men  are  that  are  more  friendly  to  the  monopoly  than  to  the 
people. 

San  Francisco  Post. 

Since  the  defeat  of  the  irrigation  measures  has  become  apparent,  a  strong 
effort  is  being  made  to  induce  the  Governor  to  call  an  extra  session  of  the 
Legislature  for  the  consideration  of  this  question  alone.     Should   it  become 


141 


necessary,  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  extra  session  will  be  held,  that  the 
rights  of  the  irrigators  may  be  thoroughly  established.  The  question  is  one 
of  too  much  importance,  and  the  interests  involved  are  too  vast  to  permit  of 
their  remaining  unsettled  for  two  years  more. 


Petaluma  Argus. 

Our  Advantaj^es. 

The  Argus  recently  referred  to  the  great  advantages  possessed  by  Sonoma 
county  over  some  other  sections  of  the  State,  in  that  our  farmers  and  orchard- 
ists  are  at  no  expense,  trouble  or  care  incident  to  artificial  irrigation.  We 
have  become  so  habituated  to  having  bounteous  yields  of  grain  and  fruit, 
assisted  alone  by  Nature's  gentle  dews,  that  we  do  not  aright  appreciate  the 
advantages  we  enjoy.  Had  our  orchardists  and  vineyardists  to  irrigate,  as 
they  have  to  in  some  of  the  southern  counties  of  the  State,  it  would  entail 
upon  them  an  expense  at  least  four-fold  that  of  their  present  tax-rate.  Water 
for  irrigation,  and  exorbitant  water-rates,  is  the  vexed  question  now  agitating 
the  iuhabitants  of  many  portions  of  the  State.  The  question  has  assumed 
the  proportions  of  a  political  issue,  and  the  most  formidable  issue  with 
which  the  present  Legislature  is  now  grappling  relates  to  riparian  rights.  The 
question  of  right  to  divert  water  from  its  natural  channel  to  slake  the  thirst 
of  arid  agricultural  and  fruit  lands  now  threaten  to  even  overshadow  the 
mining  debris  problem.  If  at  this  early  date,  when  only  a  small  portion  of 
their  lands  have  been  reduced  to  cultivation,  the  water  supply  for  irrigating 
purposes  is  a  matter  of  grave  concern,  what  will  be  the  probable  proportions 
of  that  subject  twenty  years  hence?  It  is  important  that  the  incoming  immi- 
gration to  this  State  should  be  correctly  advised  in  reference  to  the  advan- 
tages that  Sonoma  and  adjacent  counties  eujoy  in  this  respect.  Here  neither 
drought  nor  mining  debris  '•  molest  or  make  afraid  "  those  dependent  on  the 
generous  soil  for  a  livelihood.  In  these  advantages  alone  Sonoma  county  has 
a  bonanza  of  greater  value  than  was  ever  laid  bare  on  the  Comstock  Lode, 
for  it  is  as  enduring  and  imperishable  as  are  our  rich  hills  and  valleys.  With 
a  soil  and  climate  of  demonstrated  adaptability  to  the  raising  of  principally 
all  the  staple  products  of  either  grain  or  fruit,  there  is  not  within  the  borders 
of  the  State  a  more  inviting  field  for  families  seeking  homes  than  right  here 
in  Old  Sonoma.  We  are  possessed  of  the  superior  advantages  above  enumer- 
ated, and  there  is  no  good  reason  why  we  should  not  profit  by  them  to  the 
extent  of  quadrupling  our  population  in  the  next  few  years. 


S.  F.  Examiner. 

The  Slickeng  Buj^aboo. 

The  riparian  claquers,  after  ringing  the  changes  on  the  "  vested  rights  " 
business,  are  now  trying  to  raise  a  false  alarm  among  the  people  of  the  north- 
ern counties  by  pretending  to  discover  a  slickens  "joker  "  in  the  pending  irri- 


142 


gation  bills  as  amended  by  the  Senate  in  Committee  of  the  Whole.  The  lords- 
of  Kern  and  Kings  river  swamps,  who  are  the  commissaries  of  the  riparian 
squad  and  furnish  ammunition  to  the  anti-irrigatiou  sharpshooters,  would  see 
the  uoithern  half  of  the  State  buried  in  debris,  provided  their  bogs  and  mo- 
rasses are  not  interfered  with.  The  pretense  made  by  them,  that  the  naviga- 
bility of  the  rivers  of  the  State  can  be  affected  by  the  provisions  of  Assembly 
Bill  410,  or  by  any  language  added  to  the  bill  that  the  united  skill  and  inge- 
nuity of  all  the  lawyers  in  the  State  could  devise,  or  that  it  can  make  lawful 
any  use  of  water  which  is  now  unlawful,  is  the  veriest  sham.  The  courts 
have  forbidden  in  the  most  absolute  language  the  deposit  of  mining  debris  in 
the  rivers.  The  Judges  have  laid  down  the  law  to  be,  that  hydraulic  mining 
cannot  be  pursued  in  this  State  to  the  detriment  of  the  navigable  rivers,  or  to 
the  injury  of  private  property.  It  has  been  declared  by  the  courts  that  this 
law  is  inexorable  and  unchangeable;  that  the  State  Legislature  cannot  change 
it,  and  that  Congress  cannot  alter  it.  But,  even  were  it  otherwise,  there  can 
be  no  pretext  that  the  amendment  proposed  would  in  any  way  affect  the  debris 
question.  The  right  to  appropriate  water  does  not  carry  with  it  the  right  to 
fill  up  the  streams  with  slickens.  The  legislator  who  pretends  to  be  fooled 
by  the  suggestion  made  against  the  irrigationists  on  this  subject  cannot  hope 
to  make  the  people  believe  that  he  has  been  deceived. 


Santa  Cruz  Daily  Sentinel. 

The  Irrif^ation  Prospect, 

Thus  far  the  proposed  irrigation  legislation  has  made  fine  progress.  All 
the  measures  proposed  by  the  irrigation  convention  have  passed  the  Assembly 
and  appearances  indicate  that  they  will  pass  the  Senate.  The  most  import- 
ant of  the  bills  is  the  one  providing  for  the  condemnation  of  water  rights 
under  the  power  of  eminent  domain.  If  it  becomes  a  law  it  cannot  but  prove 
highly  beneficial  to  the  State.  It  will  emancipate  us  from  the  dog-in-the 
manger  spirit  that  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  theory  of  riparian  rights  as 
construed  by  the  common  law  and  the  Supreme  Court.  It  will  give  to  the 
people  of  California  what  nature  designed  for  them — an  equitable  distribu- 
tion of  the  rich  life-blood  circulating  through  the  river-veins  of  their  State. 
It  will  be  worth  all  the  expense  of  the  session  ten  times  over  if  this  measure 
ripens  into  a  law. 

The  other  irrigation  bills  are  of  more  or  less  importance,  but  do  not  com- 
pare with  the  one  above  mentioned.  They  could  all  be  defeated  without  sub- 
stantially lessening  the  good  which  that  will  accomplish.  One  of  them  de- 
clares that  the  common  law  does  not  apply  to  water  rights  in  this  State.  This 
•will  be  of  small  importance  in  the  face  of  the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court 
declaring  that  the  common  law  does  apply. 

Another  of  the  bills  repeals  the  section  of  the  civil  code  which  declares 
that  the  present  law  governing  the  appropriation  of  water  shall  not  affect 
riparian  rights.      But  the  repeal  of  that  section  will  not  prevent  the  Su- 


143 


preme  Court  from  declaring  in  the  future,  as  it  has  in  the  past,  that  ripar- 
ian rights  are  vested  rights  and  can  not  be  arbitrarily  taken  from  one  citi- 
zen and  given  to  another  by  either  courts  or  legislatures.  This  law  would  be 
useless  without  the  other  one,  sanctioning  the  taking  of  riparian  rights  for 
public  use. 

Another  bill  is  designed  to  define  the  extent  of  the  water  rights  now 
claimed  under  the  operation  of  the  present  appropriation  laws.  This  will  be 
a  useful  law,  as  it  will  tend  to  prevent  clashing  and  uncertainty  when  it  is 
sought  to  condemn  or  regulate  the  rights  of  appropriators  under  the  bill  first 
above  mentioned. 

The  remaining  bill  of  the  series  is  one  proposing  an  amendment  of  the 
Constitution  prohibiting  Supervisors  and  other  municipal  authorities  from 
.^fixing  the  price  of  water  furnished  for  sale  by  private  persons  or  corporations 
at  a  figure  that  will  not  be  at  least  seven  per  cent,  upon  the  capital  invested. 

It  will  be  seen  as  above  remarked,  that  the  first  one  of  the  bills  above 
named  is  the  one  in  which  the  people  are  specially  interested.  Every  person 
who  has  studied  this  irrigation  question  uninfluenced  by  self-interest  or 
prejudice,  will  heartily  rejoice  at  the  passage  of  this  measure,  and  will  hail 
those  members  of  the  Legislature  who  aid  in  the  good  work  with  the  plaudit, 
•'Iwelldone!" 


Kern  County  Californian. 

The  Irri£fation   Struggle . 

We  publish  in  another  column  articles  from  the  San  Francisco  Post  and  AUa, 
showing  the  earnest  fight  they  are  making  for  the  people  on  the  irrigation 
contest.  They  strike  the  key  note  for  the  future.  Although  the  battle  against 
riparianism  seems  to  be  at  its  hottest  at  this  moment,  it  is  in  truth  just  be- 
gun. The  field  of  active  operations  will  soon  be  transferred  from  the  Legis- 
lature to  the  people.  It  is  time  even  now  to  begin  preparations  for  active 
warfare  against  riparianism  and  against  all  its  friends.  In  the  coming  struggle 
let  Democrats  and  Republicans  sink  their  difl'erences  in  the  common  cause 
against  the  common  enemy.  Organize  into  anti-riparian  clabs.  Keep  in  the 
records  of  the  clubs  a  list  of  the  names  of  those  who,  either  in  the  Legislature 
or  elsewhere,  have  encouraged  riparianism  and  the  destruction  of  irrigators 
and  irrigation.  Let  every  one  of  them  be  marked  for  defeat  at  all  times  and 
in  all  places.  Beat  them  in  conventions.  Destroy  them  at  the  polls.  When- 
ever one  of  them  appears  as  a  candidate  for  office,  high  or  low,  or  is  an  aspi- 
rant for  any  favor  from  the  people,  see  to  it  that  he  is  denounced  as  recreant 
to  the  interests  of  the  people  and  unfit  to  be  trusted  by  them.  At  the  head  of 
such  a  black-list,  as  having  had  greatest  power  for  good  or  evil,  chose  to  ex- 
•ercise  it  to  crush  irrigation,  and  deliver  Southern  California  over  to  R.  E. 
10 


144 

Honghton  and  his  riparian  clients,   should  be  placed  the  following-named 
riparian,  anti-irrigation  Assemblymen: 

ALLEN,  of  Sonoma. 

COLBY,  of  Placer. 

DAVIS,  of  Sacramento. 

ELLISON,  of  Tehama. 

FIREBAU-GH,  of  San  Francisco. 

JORDAN,  of  Alameda. 

HE^[RY,  of  Butte. 

HEYWOOD,  of  Alameda. 

HOLLISTER,  of  Sacramento. 

JONES,  of  Sacramento. 

McJUNKIN,  of  San  Francisco. 

WALRATH,  of  Nevada. 

WATSON,  of  Alameda. 

WARD,  of  Butte. 

WOOD,  of  Sierra. 


San  Francisco  Alta, 

Have  the  Roll  Called. 

Not  very  long  ago  the  friends  of  irrigation  were  encouraged  to  believe  that 
viotory  in  the  Legislature  was  near  at  hand.  They  were  supported  in  the 
Assembly  by  a  majority  against  which  the  dilatory  tactics  of  Jordan,  McJun- 
kin  and  other  anti-irrigationists  were  unavailing.  A  clear  majority  of  the 
Senate  was  found  to  favor  the  bills,  but  since  they  were  taken  up  for  consid- 
eration, day  after  day  has  been  wasted  in  idle  talk.  The  efforts  of  the  ripa- 
rianists  to  suspend  action  until  it  should  be  too  late  to  get  the  bills  through 
before  adjournment,  have  been  nearly  successful.  Unless  the  Committee  of 
the  Whole  shall  report  the  bills  back  to  the  Senate  favorably  on  Monday,  and 
the  Senate  can  be  induced  to  act  immediately  upon  the  report,  they  cannot 
be  passed  before  the  expiration  of  the  constitutional  sixty  days.  This  Is  a 
most  lamentable  state  of  affairs.  That  with  a  decided  majority  of  both 
branches  of  the  Legislature  in  favor  of  legislation  for  the  relief  of  irrigation, 
all  attempts  to  reach  a  final  vote  have  failed,  is  a  source  of  profound  regret. 
The  only  remedy  open  to  relieve  the  situation  and  save  the  State  from  the 
calamity  of  non-action  for  two  years,  is  either  to  prolong  the  session  or  for  the 
Governor  to  summon  an  extra  session  for  the  exclusive  purpose  of  arriving 
at  a  solution  of  the  irrigation  problem.  But,  whatever  is  to  be  done,  if  the 
skulking  course  pursued  heretofore  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  is  pursued  on 
Monday,  the  friends  of  irrigation  in  the  Senate  should  not  fail  to  so  move  in 
the  open  Senate  as  to  discover  to  the  people  whom  they  may  depend  upon 
hereafter  to  advance  their  cause  in  the  Legislature,  and  upon  whom  they  may 
rely  to  be  faithful  to  the  greatest  of  the  State's  necessities.  If  the  leaders  of 
the  warfare  against  riparianism,  in  the  Senate,  do  not  force  a  yea  and  nay  vote 
in  that  body  before  adjournment,  so  as  to  unmask  and  drag  into  the  light  the 
men  who  cannot  be  trusted  on  this  question,  they  will  make  it  possible  for 
faithless  representatives  to  again  betray  their  trusts. 


145 


San  Francisco  Call. 

Mining'  and  Irrigf^ation. 

It  is  a  matter  for  regret  that  the  irrigation  question  should  have  become 
mixed  up  with  hydraulic  mining.  The  fact  that  the  principle  upon  which 
water  is  taken  irom  its  natural  bed  for  purposes  of  irrigation  is  the  same  as 
that  upon  which  it  is  taken  for  mining  purposes  does  not  make  these  kindred 
measures.  The  irrigationist  may  admit  the  fall  force  of  Senator  Cross's 
amendment,  and  then  proceed  to  legislate  upon  mining  and  upon  irrigation 
as  two  quite  distinct  industries.  We  may  include  the  right  to  appropriate 
water  for  mining  purposes  in  the  declaration  that  the  common  law  of  England 
■which  relates  to  riparian  rights  is  ''repugnant  to  and  inconsistent  with  the 
climate,  topography,  physical  conditions  and  necessities  of  the  people  of  this 
State,"  and  afterward  deal  with  any  branch  of  the  mining  business  on  its 
merits.  We  do  not  propose  to  stop  hydraulic  mining  on  the  ground  that  the 
Tarious  water  companies  which  supply  these  mines  have  no  right  to  the  water 
they  have  appropriated,  but  on  the  ground  that  the  owners  of  these  mines 
have  no  right  to  deposit  the  debris  from  the  mines  in  the  natural  water-beds, 
from  which  they  will  be  flooded  upon  the  valleys  below. 

When  Senator  Cross  interpolated  the  words  "and  mining"  into  the  second 
section  of  bill  410,  he  simply  creates  the  necessity  of  sending  the  bill  back  to 
the  House  for  concurrence.  The  amendment  does  no  other  harm.  A  friend 
of  the  irrigation  bill  would  not  have  thrown  this  obstacle  in  the  way  of  its 
passage;  but  there  really  is  no  reason  why  the  House  should  not  promptly 
concur  in  the  amendment  if  the  bill  passes  the  Senate.  We  think  the  Record' 
Union  attaches  too  much  importance  to  the  amendment,  while  agreeing  with 
that  journal  that  no  bill  should  be  passed  which  would  reopen  the  hydraulic 
mining  question.  The  right  to  appropriate  water  for  mining  purposes  was 
established  thirty  odd  years  ago,  so  far  as  doing  a  thing  can  establish  the 
right  to  do  it.  Hydraulic  mining  has  been  stopped  within  three  years  be- 
cause of  the  destruction  of  property  that  is  clearly  unavoidable  from  such 
operations, 

Los  Angeles  Express. 

Irri£fation  of  the  Plains, 

Emerson,  in  his  "Dictionary  of  Rural  Affairs, "  says:  "There  is  no  question 
of  more  importance  in  a  national  point  of  view  than  the  improvement  of  the 
soil  by  the  practice  of  irrigation,  for  in  its  prosecution  all  the  rich  organic 
and  other  matters  diflfased  through  the  rivers,  which  would  otherwise  be 
carried  into  the  sea,  are  saved  to  agriculture."  There  are  vast  acres  of  land, 
as  in  Egypt,  Italy,  Spain,  France  and  lodia,  where  barrenness  and  desola- 
tion would  reign  were  it  not  for  the  enrichment  furnished  by  artificial  sup- 
plies of  water. 

The  desirability  of  a  system  of  irrigation  over  an  immense  area  in  this 
State  is  now  too  generally  recognized  to  admit  of  discussion.    From  the  ex- 


146 


treme  southern  part  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley  to  the  extreme  northern  part 
of  the  Sacramento  valley  summer  crops  cannot  be  possibly  raised  without 
irrigation.  There  are  large  districts  of  the  State  where  the  hope  of  the  farmer 
is  liable  to  be  blighted  by  winter  drought  or  a  dry  season.  Then  there  are 
•other  large  plains  where  farming  is  practically  impossible  without  artificial 
«upplies  of  water.  In  many  counties  where  irrigation  is  necessary  the  topo- 
graphy of  the  country  is  such  as  to  make  it  very  difficult,  laborious  and  ex- 
pensive to  cut  canals  and  store  the  water.  Nature,  in  planning  the  topo- 
graphy of  California,  seems  to  have  had  an  eye  to  business,  and  with  a 
beneficent  foresight  has  laid  the  foundation  of  the  grandest  system  of  irriga- 
tion the  world  has  ever  seen.  From  the  mountain  ranges  along  the  entire 
eastern  boundary  of  the  State  to  the  Pacific  Ocean  on  the  west,  the  surface 
slope  is  so  gradual  that  the  waters  of  rivers  which  traverse  the  territory  can 
be  carried  in  canals  over  the  greater  part  of  this  immense  region  of  arable 
land.  The  supply  is  abundant,  and  if  properly  distributed,  would  insure 
crops  on  millions  of  acres  where  the  crops  are  now  uncertain  or  impossible, 
and  add  greatly  to  the  aggregate  wealth  of  the  State.  The  Tuolumne,  Cala- 
veras, Stanislaus,  Mokelumne,  Merced,  Fresno,  San  Joaquin,  Kings,  Kla- 
math and  Kern  rivers  embrace  a  territory  as  large  as  the  States  of  Connecti- 
cut, Rhode  Island,  Vermont  and  New  Hampshire.  It  is  believed  that  every 
ioot  of  land  in  this  immense  district  can  be  irrigated  by  the  waters  of  these 
rivers  if  properly  collected  and  fairly  distributed. 

By  an  Act  of  the  Legislature,  March  29;  1878,  the  office  of  State  Engineer 
was  created,  and  one  of  the  most  important  duties  assigned  to  it  was  that  of 
investigating  the  problem  of  irrigation.  The  problem  is  a  vast  one  that  may 
jtake  a  number  of  years  to  completely  solve.  Any  one  who  has  not  carefully 
•studied  Mr.  Hall's  report  can  form  no  adequate  idea  of  the  vast  amount  that 
•remains  to  be  accomplished.  The  general  maps  of  the  State  and  the  special 
. maps  and  profiles  that  have  been  constructed,  showing  more  minutely  and 
v^accurately  large  scopes  of  country  and  their  gradients,  as  a  basis  of  engineer- 
ing study,  are  a  monument  of  patient  and  intelligent  industry,  and  the  geo- 
^aphical,  topographical,  and  hydrographical  data  that  have  been  collected, 
■are  of  inestimable  value.  Why  our  legislators  failed  to  appreciate  the  im- 
portance of  completing  this  great  work  we  never  could  divine.  Still  less  can 
we  understand  why,  in  the  present  session  of  the  Legislature,  there  should  be 
euch  an  organized  and  determined  opposition  to  the  repeal  of  Section  1422  of 
ithe  Civil  Code.  If  the  principle  involved  in  that  section  is  allowed  to  remain 
lin  the  Code,  it  is  a  virtual  termination  of  the  whole  scheme  of  irrigation.  It 
would  turn  the  Fresno  plains,  now  dotted  with  grain  fields,  orchards,  vine- 
:yards  and  gardens,  into  a  cheerless  waste.  It  seems  hard  and  unreasonable 
cthat  a  system  of  riparian  rights  that  has  grown  up  in  another  country,  in 
anany  respects  very  dissimilar  to  this,  should  have  been  kept  alive  so  long. 
The  State  Engineer,  in  his  report,  called  the  attention  of  the  Legislature  four 
years  ago  to  the  fact  that  the  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  "  that 
water  runs  and  ought  to  run  as  it  has  ,been  accustomed  to  run,"  as  Black- 


147 


Btone  states  it,  would  make  difficulty  in  this  State  in  attempting  to  carry  oui 
a  system  of  irrigation  unless  changed  by  legislation. 


Political  Record. 

Irriiration./— Riparian  Riiplitg  and  the  Common  Ijafv,  — Tlie  Rigftitg  of  tli»- 

Peopie  are  Snprente.— Nothings  is  Guaranteed  bat  Liberty. 

Tbe  Republic  is  above  all. — Amending^  at  Pleasure. 

There  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  now  imminent  between  those  who  contend 
for  the  sovereignty  of  the  people  and  those  who  set  up  technicism,  prece- 
dent, authority,  and  vested  rights,  as  the  supreme  law  of  the  land. 

Naturally  those  who  have  got  possession  of  land,  franchises  and  monopo- 
lies are  the  advocates  of  "Vested  Rights."  Mr.  Stanford,  our  new  Senator^ 
is  of  this  class.  In  a  recent  letter  to  the  New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce- 
he  laid  down  the  broad  doctrine  that  grants  of  land  or  franchises  made  by- 
Congress  however  corruptly,  and  sustained  by  the  decisions  of  courts,  muste 
be  respected,  though  the  people  starve  and  the  Republic  perish. 

The  same  doctrine  is  held  and  argued  in  the  Legislature,  in  relation  to  the- 
common  law  and  riparian  rights.  It  is  contended  by  these  advocates  of  mo- 
nopoly that  when  the  United  States  Government  deeds  a  piece  of  land  to  a- 
private  holder,  he  takes  from  the  center  of  the  earth  to  the  vault  of  heaven^ 
with  all  the  appurtenances,  according  to  the  then  law,  and  that  the  deed  be- 
comes a  vested  right  that  no  subsequent  legislation  can  take  away.  Senator 
Cross  says  that  the  courts  of  the  United  States  will  so  adjudge  and  set  aside 
any  legislation  to  the  contrary.  And  it  will  do  so  under  the  common  law  of 
England. 

We  do  not  hold  to  this  view  of  the  case.  This  is  the  common  law,  holding 
only  till  the  people  set  it  aside  by  statute.  It  is  then  dead.  The  common 
law  is  the  very  tail  end  of  our  law,  wagged  by  all  the  rest.  While  unre- 
pealed the  United  States  Courts  would  be  bound  to  abide  by  it;  but  when 
repealed  by  statutes  it  is  dead. 

Now  what  really  is  the  common  law  in  relation  to  l^d  holding  and  riparian 
rights?  In  England  it  is  and  has  been  this,  and  nothing  more:  The  patentee 
of  land  from  the  Throne,  takes  the  land,  with  all  the  appurtenances,  as  de- 
scribed by  the  common  law  subject  to  the  statutes  of  England,  for  all  time» 
to  amend,  enlarge,  curtail,  tax,  hamper  or  nullify,  as  the  sovereign  power 
may  decree. 

True,  the  landholder  in  England  was  the  law-maker,  the  judge,  the  jury, 
and  almost  the  factotum.  He  therefore  made  his  rights  as  perfect  as  possi- 
ble. He  claimed  land,  water,  game,  fish,  everything  of  value.  Within  his 
lines  he  was  lord  of  all,  with  none  but  slaves  to  stand  in  the  way.  He  de- 
nied the  right  even  of  a  baloon  to  come  between  his  land  and  the  sun.  He 
claimed  all  tbat  fell  upon  it,  whether  from  land,  air  or  sea.  At  one  time 
human  beings  trespassing  on  it  without  his  leave  were  made  his  slaves,  serfs^ 
and  vassals,  unless  claimed  by  some  one  more  powerful. 


148 


But  the  statutes  of  England  have  stripped  the  feudal  lords  of  a  great  many 
of  these  ancient  common  law  rights.  They  have  taken  for  public  use  all 
navigable  water.  They  have  taken  the  right  of  way  for  roads,  railways 
and  through  travel.  And  recently,  in  Ireland,  the  Government  has  dictated 
the  terms  on  which  the  landowner  should  rent  and  even  sell  the  land  to  the 
tenant.  In  the  very  empire  of  the  common  law,  and  the  landholder,  and  the 
riparian  and  vested  rights,  the  Government  has  declared  that  all  must  yield 
to  the  changing  policy  of  the  times;  and  the  landholder  hold  nothing  but  what 
it  is  the  best  policy  of  the  country  to  permit. 

This  is  eminently  and  necessarily  the  law  of  the  great  Kepublic.  Onr 
fathers  well  knew  what  they  were  about  when  they  made  the  Constitution 
amendable,  forever,  at  the  will  of  the  people.  "We  cannot  have  laws  like  the 
fabled  Medes  and  Persians,  fixed  forever.  We  cannot  permit  any  man  or  any 
set  of  men  to  set  and  fix  stakes  for  us  which  we  can  neither  pull  up  nor  break 
down.  No  corrupt  Congress,  no  corrupt  courts,  no  monopolists  or  technical 
pleaders,  can  tie  a  knot  that  the  sovereign  people  cannot  untie.  If  they  do 
we  shall  cut  it.  Our  monopolist  may  as  well  know  first  as  last  that  only  the 
Republic  and  the  sovereign  will  of  the  people  can  be  supreme. 

Every  landholder  in  America  took  his  land  under  this  implied  contract.  He 
might  keep  snakes,  run  a  hydraulic  mine,  build  a  whisky-still,  or  store  his 
land  with  dynamite  till  the  people  made  a  statute  against  it,  and  then  he  u)ust 
stop.  The  State  of  California  is  sovereign.  The  United  States  sold  him  the 
land  subject  to  the  Sovereign  Power  forever.  If  now,  the  State  of  California, 
in  a  new  and  peculiar  position,  choose  to  say,  that  as  to  the  waters  of  this 
State,  and  so  far  as  they  are  needed  by  the  people  for  domestic  use,  and  for 
the  irrigation  of  land,  the  Common  Law  is  set  aside,  and  the  Statute  shall 
rule,  there  is  no  lawful  power  in  man  to  overrule  the  decree,  and  all  the 
courts  of  the  country  will  be  obliged  to  take  notice. 

Let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  the  Riparian  himself,  in  the  new  arrangement, 
will  acquire  as  a  person  and  a  resident  of  the  district,  a  right  to  water  in 
many  cases  more  useful  and  secure  than  his  riparian   right. 

But  in  any  case,  wate#in  California  becomes  a  thing  of  prime  value,  more 
than  in  most  other  lands,  and  the  people  in  taking  charge  of  it  do  but  resume 
a  right  long  monopolized  by  the  land-owner,  under  an  arrogant  and  unjust 
rule. 

Only  two  things  are  guaranteed  in  theso  United  States: 

That  the  Republic  is  forever! 

That  the  people  rule. 


Daily  Examiner. 

Riparian  liobbyigts. 

It  is  currently  reported  that  a  delegation,  composed  of  members  of  the  Re- 
publican State  Central  Committee,  are  at  Sacramento  lobbying  against  the 
irrigation  bills  and  in  favor  of  the  so-called  McClure  "compromise."    The 


149 


•end  in  view,  according  to  report,  is  the  **good  of  the  party."  It  is  to  be 
assumed  that  this  delegation  of  party  lobbyists  are  acting  by  authority  and 
represent  the  Republican  party  organization.  Their  programme  is  to  defeat 
the  bills  and  postpone  action  for  two  years  longer,  and  then  undertake  in  the 
next  political  campaign  to  shoulder  the  responsibility  of  the  defeat  upon  the 
Democrats.  They  hope  then  to  catch  the  people  with  irrigation  planks  in 
their  convention  platforms.  But  the  people  have  had  enough  of  *'  molasses 
to  catch  flies."  The  coming  political  conventions  may  pnt  irrigation  planks 
in  their  resolutions  to  their  heart's  content;  they  can  gull  the  people  no  longer 
on  this  water  question.  The  difference  between  resolving  and  acting  has  long 
since  become  apparent  to  the  masses.  What  is  wanted  is  votes  for  irrigation 
now,  not  party  resolutions  favoring  it  two  years  hence.  "We  call  the  attention 
of  the  people  to  the  fact  that  the  Republican  party  organization  is  exerting  a 
pressure  upon  Republican  Senators  against  the  public  interest  to  ac- 
complish selfish  party  ends.  If  the  votes  of  Republican  Senators  shall 
render  it  impossible  to  pass  irrigation  legislation  before  adjournment;  if  the 
head-centers  of  their  party  now  in  the  lobby  of  the  Senate  buttonholeing  Sen- 
ators against  iriigation  are  successful  in  their  efiforts  to  prolong  the  present 
unfortunate  condition  of  affairs  two  years,  their  party  must  bear  the  burden 
of  responsibility.  The  Republican  party  must  go  before  the  people  at  the 
next  election  with  a  record  they  have  made  against  the  farmers  of  the  State. 
The  people  will  thoroughly  understand  what  a  selfish  political  leadership  has 
done,  and  how  these  Republican  leaders  have  sacrificed  the  great  farming 
interests  of  California  to  serve  their  sordid  ends.  The  McClure  compromise 
Avas,  beyond  doubt,  prepared  for  the  express  purpose  of  defeating  the  irriga- 
tion legislation.  A  legislator  who  favors  it  is  opposed  to  irrigation  for  all 
time,  and  the  party  leaders  who  are  now  pressing  it  cannot  hereafter  fool  the 
people  by  idle  words  in  party  platforms.  The  Barmecide  feast  which  Mr. 
McClure  proposes  shall  satisfy  the  popular  demand  for  water  for  irrigation 
will  appease  and  satisfy  no  one.  The  time  has  arrived  when  the  question 
must  be  settled  and  legislation  must  go  upon  the  record. 

The  Republican  leaders  may  successfully  lobby  against  irrigation  measures 
now,  but  the  people  are  thoroughly  aroused  all  over  the  State.  There  is  no 
section  of  the  State  which  is  not  directly  interested  in  the  subject  of  irrigation. 
It  is  one  of  the  most  important  questions  which  has  been  presented  for  years, 
and  the  legislator  who,  at  the  dictation  of  a  few  self-styled  Republican  leaders, 
now  refuses  to  give  the  people  relief,  will  find  it  impossible  to  explain  his 
action  or  make  any  excuses  which  can  be  accepted. 

Democratic  Senators  need  not  be  reminded  that  one  of  the  great  underlying 
principks  of  Democracy — the  one  which  contributed  more  largely  than  any 
other  to  our  recent  glorious  success  in  the  nation— is  that  the  welfare  of  the 
people  is  the  piramount  law  of  the  p  irty,  and  only  by  identifying  the  party 
with  the  interests  which  the  people  have  nearest  their  hearts  can  it  hope  for 
success  in  the  future.  Let  it  not  be  said  that  the  farmers  of  the  State  asked 
jou  for  bread  and  yon  gave  them  a  stone. 


160 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Wliitney**  BUI. 

Whitney's  anti-irrigation  bill  is  a  special  order  in  the  Senate  to-day.  The- 
vote  upon  this  bill  will  discover  to  the  people  the  names  of  the  hitherto  con- 
cealed opponents  of  the  popular  irrigation  policy.  Mr.  Whitney,  a  Kepub- 
lican  Senator  from  Alameda,  proposes  by  this  bill  that  the  waters  of  the  State 
shall  be  divided  between  the  riparian  owners  and  the  swamp-land  grabbers; 
and  that  if  any  water  shall  be  left,  after  supplying  the  fever  and  ague  dis- 
tricts with  sufficient  to  prevent  the  disappearance  of  that  disease,  and  fur- 
nishing poisoned  and  putrid  water  for  cattle,  then  the  irrigators  may  have  it. 
But  rather  than  have  the  swamps  reclaimed,  irrigation  must  go  to  the  wall. 
To  catch  the  unthinking  man,  or  entrap  the  unwary  friend  of  irrigation,  this 
bill  of  Mr,  Whitney  is  the  most  shrewd  and  ingenious  decoy  that  the  ripar- 
ianists  have  set  afloat.  It  purports,  on  its  face,  to  advance  irrigation  to  the 
front  and  to  make  it  subordinate  only  to  the  use  of  water  for  domestic  pur- 
poses and  for  watering  cattle,  with  a  proviso,  however,  that  lauds  naturally 
watered  by  the  overflow  of  running  streams  shall  practically  have  the  first 
right  to  the  water  of  the  stream  to  the  extent  of  the  overflow.  The  proposition 
to  give  preference  to  that  use  of  water  for  domestic  purposes  and  for  watering 
cattle  has  been  fully  discussed  and  disposed  of  in  both  houses  of  the  Legis- 
lature, and  of  course  could  no^  stand  in  the  Whitney  bill.  But  the  sting  of 
bill  is  in  the  overflow  clause  of  Section  8.  All  of  the  rivers  of  the  upper 
and  middle  San  Joaquin  valley  end  in  swamps.  The  waters  begin  to  increase 
in  the  streams  in  the  Winter  season,  until  instead  of  being  lost  in  their  sandy 
beds  far  above  the  mouths  of  their  channels,  they  gradually  progress  until 
finally  they  reach  the  margin  of  their  swamps,  into  which  they  empty  and 
overflow.  In  the  late  Summer  the  waters  gradually  diminish  until  the  water 
no  longer  reaches  the  swamps,  and  the  terminus  of  the  flow  gradually  recedea 
up  the  river.  There  are  many  weeks  during  the  irrigating  season  when  the 
flow  of  the  stream  is  so  greatly  diminished  that,  while  a  very  large  quantity 
of  water  may  be  flowing  in  the  channel  from  the  mountains,  a  very  small' 
quantity  reaches  and  overflows  the  swamps.  At  such  times  the  diversion  of 
a  very  slight  quantity  above  would  prevent  water  from  overflowing  the 
swamps,  and  would  deprive  the  swamp  of  the  natural  overflow  provided  for 
in  the  Whitney  bill.  And  it  is  at  the  season  when  this  is  the  situation  that 
water  is  most  needed  for  irrigation.  The  whole  flow  of  the  river  is  the  nat^ 
ural  overflow  upon  the  swamp  lands,  and  this  proviso  giving  this  overflow, 
that  is  to  say,  all  the  water  of  the  river,  to  the  owner  of  the  swamp,  effect- 
ually shuts  off  all  irrigation  above. 

If  this  is  the  kind  of  irrigation  legislation  the  supporters  of  the  Heath 
amendment  and  the  Republican  leaders  in  the  Senate  propose  to  give  the 
State,  the  irrigators  will  decline  it  without  thanks.  They  prefer  the  less  in- 
jurious riparian  law. 


151 


Fresno  Expositor. 

The  Legislature  will  adjourn  without  passing  any  of  the  irrigation  bills*. 
The  Senate  has  manifested  an  intense  hostility  to  the  measures,  and  unfor- 
tunately, so  far,  there  has  been  no  roll-call,  so  that  the  irrigators  can  know 
just  who  their  friends  are.  Their  leading  enemies  are  well  known,  but  the 
individual  standing  of  each  of  the  forty  candidates  for  Governor,  Congress 
and  Senatorial  honors  is  what  the  people  want  to  know.  They  want  to  know 
them  all,  so  that  they  may  separate  the  sheep  from  the  goats. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

The  irrigators  of  Southern  California  know  who  are  the  leading  opponents, 
of  their  rights  in  the  State  Senate.  They  know  that  Kellogg,  Clay,  Webster, 
Taylor  and  Dennis  Spencer  head  the  gang.  They  know  that  this  trio  expect 
future  preferment  from  the  people,  and  they  have  iinally  made  up  their 
minds  that  not  an  irrigator's  vote  can  they  get  for  any  purpose.  These  men 
find  it  possible  to  vote  for  measures  of  taxation  favorable  to  the  railroad 
company,  but  they  cannot  find  it  possible  to  vote  for  a  bill  in  the  interest  of 
the  people.  The  Expositor  may  ever  be  counted  as  against  these,  and  other 
statesmen  of  their  kind. 


Fresno  Expositor- 

The  action  of  Cross,  of  Nevada,  in  saddling  the  mining  amendment  on  As- 
sembly Bill  No.  410,  and  known  as  the  Wigginton  Bill,  will  likely  prove  fatal. 
As  amended,  the  section  now  reads: 

'♦  Section  2.  Section  1422.  That  portion  of  the  common  law  of  England 
which  relates  to  riparian  rights  is  hereby  declared  to  be  repugnant  to  and  in- 
consistent to  the  climate,  topography,  [and]  the  physical  condition  of  this 
State,  [and  the  necessities  of  the  people  thereof]  and  the  laws  concerning  the 
appropriation  of  water  for  puposes  of  irrigation,  and  to  that  extent  [forms 
no]  part  of  such  laws  and  the  use  of  water  for  such  purposes  of  irrigation  is 
a  public  use." 

As  amended  the  bill  will  be  opposed  by  the  representatives  of  the  ' '  slick- 
ens  "  counties,  and  it  looks  as  if  the  measure — the  only  one  that  can  bring, 
instant  relief  to  the  irrigation  interests— will  be  defeated,  as  so  few  days  re- 
main of  the  session.  The  "statesmen"  of  the  Senate  will  do  well  to  remem- 
ber that  they  are  marked,  and  that  every  man  who  has  not  openly  shown  his 
hand  in  behalf  of  the  irrigators  will  be  classed  as  against  them,  and  so  will 
be  "knifed"  in  future  should  they  aspire  for  office. 

The  Examiner  holds  up  Assemblymen  McJunkin  and  Firebaugh,  of  San 
Francisco  to  public  scorn  for  their  repeated  and  persistent  efforts  to  prevent 
irrigation  legislation.     Good. 


152 


San  Jose  Republican. 

\Fhat  are  Riparian  Rigrhts? 

It  may  not  be  out  of  order  to  give  a  definite  answer  to  this  question,  for 
there  are  many  who  think  they  understand  it  who  do  not.  The  word  "ripa- 
rian" is  derived  from  a  Latin  word  meaning  "river,"  or  the  "bank  of  a  river," 
generally  the  latter.  "  Eiparian  rights,"  therefore,  may  be  said  to  be  the 
rights  a  man  may  have  because  of  his  living  on  the  banks  of  a  river  or  creek. 
The  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  may  be  stated  as  follows:  The  owner  of  land 
owns  the  water  running  through  it,  and  the  owner  of  land  higher  up  the 
stream  cannot  reduce  its  volume  or  impair  its  quantity  to  his  detriment. 
The  application  of  this  doctrine  in  this  State  has  been  limited  to  two  condi- 
tions— where  a  ditch  company  appropriated  the  water  for  irrigation  purposes 
five  years  before  the  riparian  owner  complained,  he  is  estopped  by  the  statute 
of  limitation;  and,  second,  where  the  riparian  owner  cannot  show  actual 
damage  by  the  withdrawal  of  water  from  the  stream  by  an  appropriator 
higher  up,  he  cannot  claim  an  injunction  against  the  appropriator,  Kiparian 
rights  are  found  often  to  interfere  with  what  appear  to  be  the  rights  of  others 
who  do  not  own  land  on  the  river  bank;  for  those  who  are  not  on  the  bank 
might  often  be  able  to  use  the  water  for  irrigation  with  profit  if  allowed  to 
take  it  out  farther  up  the  stream.  This  is  the  "irrigation  "question,  stated 
in  a  general  way,  that  hds  been  agitating  our  Legislature — how  to  give  the 
man  who  is  not  on  the  bank  of  the  stream  a  chance  at  the  water.  It  is  now 
pretty  certain  that  nothing  will  be  done  this  session. 


Modesto  Eepublican. 

Anti-Monopoly  Senators. 

The  friends  of  the  water  and  land  monopolists  iu  the  Senate,  thus  far,  have 
managed  to  avoid  placing  themselves  on  the  record  against  irrigation  by  par- 
liamentary tactics.  Occasionally,  however,  one  of  them  shows  his  hand. 
The  other  day  the  anti-monopoly  Senator  from  Napa,  Dennis  Spencer,  so  far 
forgot  himself  as  to  make  a  pathetic  and  tearful  appeal  in  behalf  of  Miller  & 
Lux.  Of  course,  the  Hon.  gentleman  would  like  to  have  the  people  believe 
that  his  remarks  were  of  a  general  nature,  and  applied  to  monopolists  gener- 
ally, and  not  to  Miller  &  Lux  in  particular.  Be  that  as  it  may,  there  is  no 
getting  around  the  fact  that  his  speech  was  in  the  interest  of  the  water  mo- 
nopolists, and  as  Miller  &  Lux  are  to  be  the  greatest  beneficiaries  by  the  Hon. 
Senator's  speech,  it  is  but  fair  to  presume  that  he  drew  his  inspiration  from 
those  gentlemen.  There  are  other  honorable  Senators  who  have  been  some- 
what conspicuous  in  their  opposition  to  irrigation  measures.  Among  them 
we  find  the  names  of  Taylor  and  Kellogg.  Now,  all  of  these  gentlemen  may, 
and  no  doubt  have  political  aspi  |^.tions,  and  they  may  as  well  make  up  their 
minds  now,  that  the  irrigators  will  go  for  their  scalps,  as  surely  as  they  ever 
show  their  heads  for  office.    The  Freano  Exposiiort  in  this  connection,  says: 


153 


■**  The  Expositor  may  ever  be  contented  as  against  these,  and  other  statesmen 
of  their  kind."    So  say  we. 

What  a  blessing  it  is  to  have  such  an  abundance  of  water  flowing  down  to 
the  sea  in  undisturbed  grandeur;  but  more  especially  when  a  dry  year  puts  in 
an  appearance.     See  Senator  Dennis  Spencer's  speech  against  irrigation. 

Dennis  Spencer,  and  men  of  his  ilk,  by  courtesy  called  Hon.,  are  fairly 
entitled  to  the  name  of  prohibitionists.  They  favor  the  prohibition  of  the  use 
of  water,  except  by  the  favored  few. 


Santa  Ana  Standard. 

Our  legislature  is  gettiog  down  to  business.  All  of  the  irrigation  measures 
pending  in  the  lower  house  were  passed  on  Tuesday  by  large  majorities,  but 
they  have  to  run  the  risk  of  being  butchered  in  the  Senate  by  men  who  are 
owned  and  controlled  by  capitalists  and  corporations. 


Santa  Barbara  Press. 

The  bill  to  make  irrigation  lawful  and  possible  passed  the  Assembly  by  the 
following  vote: 

Ayes— Messrs.  Ashe,  Banbury,  Barnes,  Barnett,  Buhlert,  Carter  of  Contra 
Costa,  Clark,  Cook,  Corcoran,  Daley,  Deveny,  De  Witt,  Dooling,  Franklin, 
French,  Goucher,  Gregory,  Hazard,  Henley,  Hunt,  Hussey,  Johnson,  Jordan, 
Kalben.  Lafferty,  Long,  Loud,  Lovell,  May,  McDonald,  McGlashan,  McLean, 
McMurray,  Mears,  Moffitt,  Munday,  Patterson,  Pallet,  Pyle,  Reeves,  Eose- 
berry,  Russ,  Sullivan,  Swayne,  Torrey,  Van  Voorhies,  Watson,  of  Eldorado; 
Ward,  of  San  Francisco;  Weaver,  Woodward,  Yule,  and  Mr,  Speaker — 51. 

Noes — Messrs.  Allen,  Colby,  Coleman,  Davis,  Ellison,  Firebaugh,  Heath, 
Henry,  Haywood,  Hollister,  Jones,  McJunken,  Walrath,  Watson,  of  Alameda, 
Ward,  of  Butte,  and  Wood— 16. 


Riverside  Press  and  Horticulturist. 

Honor  to  TTlioin  Honor  is  Due. 

The  irrigation  question  has  become  the  great  problem  of  the  State.  It  has 
been  the  one  great  question  which  has  occupied  the  time  and  careful  consid- 
eration of  the  present  Legislature  assembled  at  Sacramento.  It  has  been  the 
only  great  question  before  that  body,  the  election  of  a  United  States  Senator 
even  being  but  a  little  ripple  as  compared  with  the  great  tidal  wave  of  irri- 
gation that  has  swept  over  the  State. 


164 

The  Tehama  Democrat. 

Who  are  They  ? 

That  staunch  old  advocate  of  the  people's  rights,  the  San  Francisco  Exam- 
iner, asks  the  following  pertinent  questions  : 

The  reports  from  Sacramento  show  that  some  twelve  or  fifteen  Senators 
are  "  dodging  "  the  irrigation  bills  by  refraining  from  voting.  Yet,  when  the 
Heath  Amendment  to  reduce  railroad  taxes  was  passed,  every  Senator  was 
in  his  seat  and  voted.  The  passage  of  the  irrigation  bills  is  one  of  as  much 
importance  to  the  people  as  the  adoption  of  the  Heath  Amendment  is  to  the 
railroad  company.  Is  the  inference  to  be  drawn  that  the  Senate  believes  in 
making  the  public  interest  subordinate  to  that  of  the  railroad  ?  Explana- 
tion seems  to  have  been  the  order  of  the  day  at  the  final  roll-call  upon  the 
Heath  amendment.  Many  Senators  took  occasion  to  explain  their  votes. 
It  would  not  be  entirely  uncalled  for  if  the  Senators  not  voting  upon  the  irri- 
gation bills  would  rise  and  explain  their  silence.  There  is  more  or  less  curi- 
osity to  know  who  these  men  are  that  are  more  friendly  to  the  monopoly 
than  to  the  people.  ^■ 

S.  F.  Examiner. 

ACT. 

It  is  about  time  that  that  extraordinary  body,  presumed  to  represent  the 
people  of  California,  and  now  holding  its  meetings  in  Sacramento  under  the 
name  of  the  Legislature  of  California,  should  begin  to  legislate  for  the  peo- 
ple who  elected  them.  Every  railroad  measure  has  been  passed.  Every  ap- 
propriation, except  those  from  which  the  people  of  the  State,  as  a  whole, 
could  derive  some  benefit,  has  met  with  the  most  favorable  consideration; 
every  retainer  has  been  given  a  clerkship;  nearly  every  raid  upon  the  Treas- 
ury has  been  successful.  Commercially  speaking,  the  Legislature  has,  per- 
haps, been  to  some  people  a  grand  financial  success.  As  the  monopoly,  the 
lobby,  the  clerks,  porters  and  parties  asking  appropriations  have  been  wholly 
and  fully  satified,  it  is  not  too  much  to  ask  that  the  Legislature  now  take 
action  on  the  irrigation  question.  There  has  certainly  been  time  enough  to 
consider  the  matter.  The  people  are  demanding,  and  have  a  right  to  de- 
mand that  something  shall  be  done.  The  time  has  come  when  all  masque- 
rading must  end.  We  simply  ask  that  the  tactics  which  have  blocked  irriga- 
tion legislation  be  abandoned,  and  that  the  irrigation  measures  be  permitted 
to  come  up  for  final  discussion  and  decision.  The  legislators  who  have  shown 
such  eagerness  to  forward  monopoly  measures  in  the  past  should  now  be 
willing  to  permit  the  people's  measure  to  come  before  the  Legislature  for 
action  one  way  or  the  other.  We  trust  that  hereafter  no  legislator  who  was 
elected  as  a  Democrat  will  record  his  vote  against  action  on  the  irrigation  bills. 


155 


S.  F.  Chronicle. 

The  lie^fisla'ture. 

On  Thursday  last  the  sixty  days  for  which  members  of  the  Legislature  are 
constitutionally  entitled  to  draw  pay  expired.  Since  then  they  have  been 
serving  for  love.  Speaker  Parks,  looking  at  the  situation  from  the  stand- 
point of  the  Drainage  claims,  ruled  some  time  ago  that  "sixty  days"  meant 
sixty  working  days.  But  the  Speaker,  who,  with  all  his  faults,  is  not  a  fool, 
knows  that  the  Constitution  will  not  bear  any  such  construction,  and  Con- 
troller Dunn  will  not  draw  his  warrant  in  favor  of  any  member  for  a  larger 
sum  than  $480,  no  matter  how  long  the  session  lasts.  We  may  therefore  feel 
pretty  sure  that  the  session  will  end  to-morrow  or  next  day,  and  the  irriga- 
tion measures  will  have  to  go  to  another  Legislature.  It  will  cause  much 
-trouble  in  the  southern  counties,  but  the  event  will  be  chieflj'  memorable 
from  the  slaughter  of  ambitious  politicians  which  it  will  involve.  Many  a 
budding  statesman  will  trace  the  overthrow  of  his  prospects  in  life  to  the 
mistake  he  made  in  opposing  irrigation  in  1885. 

There  is  no  prospect  of  an  extra  session.  The  men  who  resisted  and  de- 
feated irrigation  measures  at  the  regular  session  would  resist  and  defeat  them 
■&t  an  extra  session.  Whitney  would  be  there  with  a  bill  to  block  the  way, 
and  Spencer,  of  Napa,  would  exhaust  the  patience  of  the  Senate  with  more 
harangues  to  show  that  irrigation  in  the  south  would  prove  fatal  to  the  inter- 
ests of  some  peanut  and  candy  store  in  the  lovely  town  of  Napa.  Cox  would 
tell  the  story  of  his  cows  which  died  of  thirst,  owing  to  the  diversion  of  their 
water  supply;  and  Langford  and  Baldwin  would  rally  to  the  support  of  ac- 
quired rights.  In  a  word,  there  would  be  men  enough  to  defeat  legislation. 
The  irrigators  must  make  no  mistake. 


Sierra  Mountain  Messenger. 

Warm  Contest. 

The  irrigationists  and  "raparians"  [as  yerrunkle  Stidger  phrases  it],  are 
at  it,  hot  foot  in  the  Legislature.  While  it  is  of  no  direct  personal  interest  to 
many  of  Sierra  county  people,  there  is  considerable  quiet  satisfaction  to  be 
derived  from  the  fact  that  the  rabid  anti-mining  faction  is  split  square  in  two 
in  the  middle.  The  riparian  doctrine  was  a  fine  thing  as  long  as  it  affected 
nobody  but  the  "vandal  "  miner,  but  when  the  principle  was  invoked  to  pre- 
vent the  irrigationist  from  getting  water  to  irrigate  their  dry  land,  the  matter 
assumed  a  different  aspect.  The  riparian  law  is  an  old  English  arrangement, 
and  is  doubtless  well  suited  to  a  country  that  is  fortunate  if  it  gets  thirty 
fair  days  in  a  year,  but  is  not  so  well  adapted  to  a  country  where  the  condi- 
tions are  reversed.  We  hope  the  irrigationists  will  win,  for  unless  they  do, 
large  sections  of  several  of  the  Southern  counties  will  become  depopulated, 
and  will  return  to  the  condition  of  a  howling  wilderness,  from  which  they 
have  been  redeemed. 


156 


Los  Angeles  Herald. 

The  tactics  resorted  to  by  obstructionists  in  tlie  Assembly  for  the  purpose 
of  staving  off  action  on  the  Irrigation  bill,  though  persistent,  serve  only  to 
make  the  friends  of  the  cause  more  in  earnest  than  ever.  Some  of  the  ob- 
structionists clutch  at  very  fragile  straws.  One  ingenious  gentleman,  when 
at  length  the  previous  question  was  moved  for  the  purpose  of  putting  an  end 
to  the  farcial  amendments  offered  by  the  opposition,  rose  to  remark  that  he 
had  nothing  to  say  on  the  motion,  and  was  reminded  promptly  by  the 
Speaker  that  he  could  not  say  anything,  being  out  of  order.  The  question 
was  put.  It  is  not  probable  that  the  passage  of  the  bill  can  now  be  prevented 
by  the  kind  of  tactics  mentioned.  Should  the  bill  become  a  law,  as  there  is 
now  every  reason  to  hope  and  believe,  our  people  will  have  cause  to  be  grate- 
ful to  the  gentlemen  who  composed  the  Fresno  Convention,  and  to  those 
now  aiding  in  the  passage  of  the  bill. 


Contra  Costa  Gazette. 

The  Irrigation  Bill. 

We  doubt,  as  stated  last  week,  if  the  legislation  now  being  sought  in  aid  of 
the  irrigators  will  prove  altogether  effective.  But  it  is  a  movement  in  the 
right  direction,  and  any  existing  defects  in  the  Irrigation  District  Bill  may 
be  remedied  two  years  hence.  In  the  meanwhile  it  is  a  good  idea  to  keep 
before  us  the  legislators  who  are  working  for  the  best  interests  of  the  farmers 
and  the  State.     The  bill  passed  the  Assembly  by  the  following  votes: 

For  irrigation— Ashe,  Banbury,  Barnes,  Barnet,  Buhlert,  Carter  of  Contra 
Costa,  Clark,  Cook,  Corcoran,  Daley,  Daveney,  DeWitt,  Dooling,  Franklin, 
French,  Goucher,  Gregory,  Hazard,  Henley,  Hunt,  Hussey,  Johnson,  Kal- 
ben,  Laffarty,  Long,  Loud,  Lovell,  May,  McDonald,  McGlashan,  McMurray, 
Mears,  Moffat,  Munday,  Patterson,  Pellet,  Pyle,  Reeves,  Eoseberry,  Euss, 
Sullivan,  Swayne,  Torrey,  Van  Voorhies,  Watson  of  El  Dorado,  Ward  of  San 
Francisco;  Weaver,  Woodward,  Yule,  and  Parks— 50, 

Against  irrigation — Allen,  Colby,  Coleman,  Davis,  Ellison,  Firebaugh, 
Jordan,  Heath,  Henry,  Heywood,  Hollister,  Jones,  McJunkin,  Walrath,  Wat- 
son of  Alameda,  Ward  of  Butte,  and  Wood. 


Pacific  Rural  Press. 

Irrifi^atlon  Ijaivg. 

This  past  week  has  seen  quite  a  gratifying  advancement  in  irrigation  legis- 
lation at  Sacramento.  Setting  apart  a  special  portion  of  each  day  to  these 
important  matters  has  proved  a  wise  arrangement.  The  will  of  the  people  has 
been  signified  by  numerous  petitions  and  resolutions,  and  by  the  sending  of 
committees  to  assure  the  legislators  of  the  disposition  of  the  various  districts 
represented.     So  far  as  we  have  observed,  these  expressions  have  been  largely 


167 


on  the  side  of  the  Fresno  Convention  bills,    or  at  least  in  the  affirmation  of" 
the  principle  embodied  in  them. 

The  Assembly  has  proceeded  further  than  the  Senate  up  to  the  time  of ' 
writing  on  Wednesday.  Last  night  in  the  Assembly,  on  motion  of  Weaver, 
the  irrigation  bills  were  taken  up  and  finally  passed;  No.  171  repealing  the 
common  law  of  England  in  as  far  as  it  guarantees  riparian  owners  any  rights 
in  this  State,  by  a  vote  of  52  yeas  to  11  nays;  and  bill  170,  providing  for  the 
diversion  of  water  and  the  adjudication  of  all  water  rights,  by  the  same  vote. 
The  constitutional  amendment,  placing  the  minimum  rate  that  may  be  allowed 
corporations  for  water  supplied  for  irrigation  or  domestic  purposes  at  seven 
per  cent,  on  the  investment  in  said  works,  was  finally  passed  by  a  vote  of  56 
yeas  to  13  nays. 

Santa  Barbara  Republican. 

Cheek! 

Our  evening  contemporary  says:  "The  Republicans  have  complete  control 
of  the  present  Legislature."  For  pure  unadulterated  cheek  commend  us  to 
the  News.  What  has  become  of  the  twenty  Democratic  Senators  the  Democ- 
racy made  so  much  talk  about  before  the  convening  of  the  present  session  of 
the  Legislature?  Those  unterrified,  incorruptible  twenty,  with  the  President 
of  the  Senate,  are  a  majority  of  that  body,  which  gives  the  Democracy  the 
control,  and  they  made  it  their  boast,  before  the  Legislature  met,  that  the 
Senate  would  be  Democratic,  and  would  hold  the  "black  Republican  aboli- 
tion Assembly  in  check."  Well,  the  Democratic  Senate  has  held  the  Repub- 
lican Assembly  in  check  sure  enough.  The  Republican  Assembly  passed  the 
irrigation  bills;  bills  that  had  for  their  object  the  emancipation  of  the  people 
of  this  State  from  the  grinding  exactions  of  a  soulless  set  of  land  sharks  and 
water  monopolists.  What  fate  awaited  these  bills  in  the  Democratic  anti- 
monopoly  Senate?  Why,- defeat,  as  might  have  been  expected.  Yes,  the 
Democratic  Senate  is  holding  the  Republican  Assembly  in  check,  with  a  blank 
to  it.  It  appears  that  what  was  meant  by  holding  the  "Republican  Assembly 
in  check,"  was  that  the  Democratic  Senate  would  protect  the  water  mo- 
nopolists from  any  interference  with  their  monopoly  by  the  Assembly.  Great 
is  water  monopoly,  and  the  Democracy  is  its  friend. 


Pacific  Rural  Press. 

Irrigfation, 

The  irrigation  issue  at  Sacramento  has  apparently  been  lost  for  this  session.. 
One  week  ago  there  seemed  a  good  chance  of  passing  the  bills  necessary  for 
placing  this  matter  upon  a  sound  footing,  but  by  some  sort  of  legislative 
hocus-pocus,  the  strength  which  was  then  shown  has  been  fritted  away,  and 
those  who  labored  all  winter  to  secure  the  desired  enactments,  have  appar- 
ently given  up  the  fight.  What  will  be  the  ultimate  result  cannot  be  foreseen,. 


158 


but  it  can  hardly  help  spreading  great  distrust  and  disappointment  throughout 
the  irrigated  districts  until  some  relief  can  come  from  some  quarter.  Mr. 
-J.  Dr.  Barth  Shorb,  who  has  given  the  last  three  months  to  solid  work  in  the 
interest  of  the  irrigators,  expressed  his  views  to  a  reporter  of  the  Chronicle 
on  Tuesday,  in  referring  to  the  total  failure  of  irrigation  legislation  this  ses- 
sion— he  spoke  quietly  but  very  seriously.  He  did  not  disguise  the  fact  that 
he  entertained  grave  fears  as  to  the  result  of  the  attempt  which  must  soon 
be  made  to  shut  off  the  water  from  the  irrigators  drawing  supplies  from 
King's  and  other  rivers.  This,  of  course,  is  assuming  that  the  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  bank  will  confirm  the  decisions  already  made  in  the 
case  of  the  riparian  owners  against  the  irrigators.  This  has  been  a  dry  sea- 
son where  the  water  obtained  from  irrigation  works  is  especially  needed,  and, 
as  the  irrigators  believe  they  have  acquired  their  rights  under  the  law,  and  as 
to  be  deprived  of  them  means  obsolute  ruin  to  thousands,  there  will  be  seri- 
ous trouble  when  the  attempt  is  made  to  take  the  water  out  of  their  irrigating 
canals.  The  Supreme  Court's  decision  must  be  made  by  the  12th  of  this 
month,  following  close  upon  the  refusal  of  the  Legislature  to  grant  relief. 
Mr.  Shorb  concluded  by  saying  that  he  had  done  all  in  his  power  to  secure 
-the  passage  of  the  Fresno  bills,  but  had  met  a  power  in  the  Legislature  which 
is  supreme  here  and  against  which  it  is  useless  to  strive. 


Maxwell  Colusa  Star. 

Sacramento,  February  25,  1885. 

Editor  Stab:  The  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion desire  to  convey  to  you  their  thanks  and  the  gratitude  of  every  irriga- 
tor in  California  for  the  kindly  appreciation  you  have  shown  of  the  justice  of 
their  cause,  and  the  substantial  aid  you  have  rendered  them,  through  the 
columns  of  your  paper.  The  subject  of  irrigation  is  the  leading  question  of 
the  day  in  this  State,  and  is  destined  to  overshadow  all  other  potitical  issues 
before  the  people.  All  far  minded  men  are  satisfied  that  the  bills  now  before 
the  Legislature,  prepared  by  this  committee,  are  the  best  yet  proposed,  and 
should  pass.  Their  imperfections  will  become  known  by  experience,  and 
changes  and  amendments  will  become  necessary  in  the  future.  The  gigantic 
proportions  which  the  irrigation  interests  have  already  assumed,  together 
with  the  certainty  of  increase  of  the  hundreds  of  thousands  now  interested, 
to  millions  in  the  not  distant  future,  warrant  the  belief  that  henceforth  the 
irrigation  question  will  always  be  second  to  none. 

Ths  enemies  of  irrigation  are  leaving  no  stone  unturned  to  defeat  the  pop- 
"ular  will  in  the  Legislature.  Nothing  will  finally  crush  riparianism  but  un- 
ceasing efforts  of  those  arrayed  on  the  side  oi  irrigation.  Your  record  upon 
this  subject  assures  us  and  the  people  of  your  continued  and  active  support. 

We  herewith  inclose  a  copy  of  the  address  of  this  committee,  containing 
an  appendix  of  expressions  of  the  press  upon  irrigation.     The  lack  of  time 


159 


has  necessarily  made  it  impossible  to  obtain  extracts  from  all  papers  which 
are  on  the  people's  side  of  the  question.  "We  hope  in  another  pamphlet 
to  present  to  the  people  the  views  of  all  the  papers  in  the  State. 

Very  respectfully, 

J.  DjaBarth  Shobb,   *       H.  S.  Dixon, 

J.  F.  Wharton,  L.  B.  Ruggles, 

W.  S.  Green,  E.  H.  Tucker, 

E.    D.    HUDNUT,  D.    ZUMWALT. 

Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention. 


I 


The  San  Francisco  Call. 

The  Ii-risfation  Bills. 

The  Irrigation  Committee  has  issued  a  last  appeal.  There  is  time  for  the 
Senate  to  heed  it,  but  no  one  expects  it  will.  There  is  apparently  a  profound 
respect  for  vested  rights  in  that  body.  Senators  argue  with  a  show  of  force, 
that  the  owners  of  lands  along  the  banks  of  streams  cannot  lawfully  be  de- 
prived of  a  portion  of  the  water  that  they  may  desire  to  retain.  In  this  water 
case  there  must  be  a  compromise  of  rights.  People  went  to  work  in  this  State 
and  used  water  without  kpowing  exactly  what  rights  they  had.  There  was  a 
general  understanding  that  the  use  of  water  *vould  eventually  be  settled  on  the 
general  principle  of  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number.  There  are  no 
fixed  and  uniform  laws  governing  the  use  of  water  in  different  countries.  One 
nation  exacts  one  set  of  water  laws  and  another  another  set  with  due  regard 
to  the  conditions  prevailing  in  each.  In  this  State,  water  was  appropriated  for 
certain  uses  before  any  laws  were  made.  It  was  by  this  appropriation  and 
use  that  the  most  profitable  use  of  water  could  best  be  determined.  The  Irri- 
gation Committee's  address  says  that  the  people  who  went  upon  the  arid  des* 
erts  of  California  demonstrated  that  the  State  can  be  mad^  to  sustain  a  popu- 
lation equal  to  that  of  the  entire  Union  at  the  present  time.  These  people, 
then,  have  developed  a  use  for  water  which  we  did  not  know  to  exist.  We 
knew  the  arid  deserts  were  there,  but  we  did  not  know  what  they  could  be 
made  to  produce.by  means  of  irrigation.  The  relative  value  of  water  to  the 
general  public  for  purposes  of  irrigation  to  the  value  of  water  running  in 
streams  to  the  same  public,  must  enter  largely  into  this  question.  What  use 
of  the  water  will  do  the  most  good?  Individual  rights  in  what  the  law  gives^ 
individuals  must  be  protected,  but  in  this  case  the  riparianist's  rights  are  at 
best  constructive  or  inferential.  They  assume  that  they  have  such  and  such 
rights  because  in  some  other  country  a  set  of  laws  which  would  give  them 
such  rights  has  been  enacted.  There  is  not  a  man  claiming  to  own  water 
through  the  ownership  of  land  who  did  not  become  possessed  of  his  land  with 
the  full  knowledge  that  his  right  to  water  would  be  disputed.  The  first  thing 
people  did  in  this  State  was  to  take  water  out  of  its  natural  channel  and  con- 
duct it  where  it  would  perform  a  more  valuable  service.  Water  was  carried 
hundreds  of  miles  in  ditches  and  used  in  mining  before  a  location  of  land  was 
11 


160 


made.  The  land  locator  could  not  know  more  than  the  water  appropriator 
what  would  be  the  final  determination  of  the  question  as  to  the  title  in  water. 
The  talk  about  vested  rights  under  these  circumstances  is  ill  timed.  Rights 
in  water  in  this  State  have  never  been  defined.  The  Supreme  Court  has  given 
an  interpretation  of  law  based  upon  the  common  law  of  England.  But  the 
common  law  cannot  be  made  to  stand  against  a  positive  enactment;  it  only 
stands  as  law  in  cases  where  there  is  no  positive  enactment.  The  experiment 
of  irrigation  has  now  proceeded  to  that  point  which  warrants  final  action  as  to 
the  use  of  water.  It  has  been  demonstrated  that  water  will  do  a  greater  good 
to  a  greater  number  when  used  for  irrigation  purposes  than  for  any  other  pur- 
pose. The  question  for  legislators  to  solve  is  if  the  interests  of  the  few  shall 
overcome  the  interests  of  the  many.  Is  the  development  of  the  State  to  be 
arrested  because  a  few  men  declare  that  when  they  located  or  purchased  cer- 
tain lands  they  understood  that  they  acquired  ownership  of  certain  water?  It 
is  clear  that  these  riparianists  had  no  actual  title  to  the  water,  but  that  they 
assumed  that  such  title  would  be  awarded  to  them  by  the  courts.  As  a  funda- 
mental principle  in  law  it  may  be  said  that  the  individual  has  no  absolute 
right  to  water  in  its  natural  bed  except  for  personal  use.  If  there  is  but  water 
enough  to  serve  as  a  beverage  for  a  community,  the  right  of  each  individual  is 
limited  to  the  use  of  water  for  that  purpose.  An  excess  may  be  divided  in  the 
same  way.  But  the  individual  may  only  acquire  a  property  right  in  water 
when  there  is  an  excess  above  the  wants  of  the  community  which  may  be 
made  useful  elsewhere  by  the  investment  of  labor  or  money.  The  nature  of 
that  use  should  be  finally  determined  by  its  comparative  value  for  one  pur- 
pose or  another.  The  sooner  the  doctrine  that  the  individual  can  acquire  an 
ownership  in  water  in  its  natural  bed  which  he  may  appropriate  to  his  own 
use  without  regard  to  the  general  good  of  the  community  is  exploded  the 
better.  There  has  been  too  much  of  that  kind  of  speculation  in  this  State 
already. 

San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

The  Vote  on  Irrigation. 

"Friday's  vote  on  the  motion  in  the  State  Senate  to  take  up  the  Irrigation 
measures  in  preference  to  the  swarm  of  jobs  which  have  got  precedence  on  the 
Senate  file,  enables  us  to  classify  members  and  will  show  the  people  where 
they  belong.  It  goes  without  saying  that  six  of  the  San  Francisco  Senators — 
Boone,  Creighton,  Days,  Dougherty,  Drum  and  Kelly — voted  wrong.  No  one 
•expected  them  to  vote  right.  It  is  not  their  style.  They  know,  or  ought  to 
know,  that  the  irrigation  of  the  southern  counties  is  vital  to  the  future  pros- 
perity of  this  city,  but  for  reasons  which  all  can  conjecture,  they  voted  not  to 
take  up  the  bills.  Cross  and  Wallis,  of  Nevada,  dealt  a  stab  at  the  mining 
interest  of  their  county  by  antagonizing  the  members  from  the  south.  They, 
like  the  San  Franciscans,  rarely  vote  right  on  anything,  but  they  might  have 
realized  that  before  long  the  mining  counties  will  want  something,  and  thai 


161 

it  -was  bad  policy  to  make  enemies  in  advanoeiof  men  who  will  haye  it  in  their 
power  to  deny  their  request  for  favors.  What  harm  would  it  have  done 
Nevada  to  let  Kern  and  Tulare  have  water? 

Some  votes  are  inexplicable.  Cox  is  understood  to  be  a  riparian  owner; 
but  Baldwin  and  Langford  of  San  Joaquin,  and  Saxe  of  Santa  Clara,  repre- 
sent communities  which  are  as  much  interested  in  irrigation  as  any  part  of 
the  State.  There  may  be  private  interests  in  those  counties  which  would  be 
injured  by  a  general  system  of  irrigation,  but  Senators  are  supposed  to  rep- 
resent counties,  not  companies.  What  purpose  Spencer,  of  Napa,  is  driving 
at  in  his  malicious  opposition  of  all  measures  of  irrigation,  cannot  be  con- 
ceived. He  passes  for  a  man  of  brains.  Can  he  not  see  that  irrigation  is 
going  to  be  a  vital  issue,  and  that  men  who  get  squarely  on  the  record  against 
it  had  better  order  their  political  coffins  at  once. 

The  votes  of  Kellogg  and  DeLong  are  not  worth  discussing.  They  will  go 
back  to  their  constituents  with  the  proud  distinction  of  never  once  having 
Toted  right  on  any  measure.  But  surely  such  sensible  Senators  as  Taylor  of 
Shasta  and  Chandler  of  Yuba  will  see  that  duty  as  well  as  common  sence 
requires  them  to  reconsider  the  position  they  have  assumed.  Shasta  wants  a 
great  deal,  and  Taylor  is  supposed  to  want  a  little  something.  Is  this  the 
-way  to  get  it? 

The  irrigators  have  got  the  men  once  on  the  record.  Let  them  try  it  again. 
If  such  measures  as  the  public  interest  requires  cannot  be  passed,  let  the 
people  at  all  events  be  thoroughly  informed  who  are  the  men  that  defeat 
them.  Time  moves  slowly,  but  it  moves,  and  the  day  of  retribution,  though 
•deferred,  will  come  at  last. 


Daily  Alta  California. 

A  liittle  More  Patience. 

The  friends  of  irrigation  in  the  Legislature  now  have  the  inside  track. 
Thus  far,  the  desperate  efforts  of  the  riparianists  to  adjourn  without  action 
have  been  futile.  By  patience  and  good  management  the  irrigation  bills  can 
be  passed  through  the  coming  week ;  to  do  this,  however,  business  must  be 
dispatched  rapidly  and  without  waste  of  time  in  useless  talk.  The  policy  of 
the  riparian  minority  will  continue  to  be  delay.  They  will  attempt  to  wear 
members  out  by  filibustering  motions  and  long-winded  speeches.  The  gen- 
eral questions  involved  have  been  fully  and  exhaustively  debated.  No  one 
who  has  participated  either  as  speaker  or  listener  is  now  uninformed  as  to 
the  relative  merits  of  riparianism  and  irrigation.  The  time  has  come  when 
argument  is  no  longer  effective.  Those  who  have  taken  the  riparian  side  of 
the  question  are  no  sooner  refuted  in  one  objection  than  they  raise  another. 

Having  exhausted  all  the  feeble  arguments  the  riparian  attorneys  have  been 
able  to  invent,  they  are  now  wearying  the  Senate  with  tiresome  reiterations 
of  their  exploded  fallacies.  For  the  remainder  of  the  session  less  talking  and 
the  more  voting,  the  sooner  and  more  satisfactory  will  be  the  result.    One 


162 


riparian  Senator  is  opposing  the  bills  from  motives  of  petty  spite.  Another 
treats  the  irrigation  problem  as  simply  of  local  interest.  A  third  trembles 
lest  the  Supreme  Court  take  offense  at  what  he  is  pleased  to  term  an  attempt 
to  usurp  judicial  functions  and  influence  the  judgment  of  the  Court.  It  is 
suggested  here,  parenthetically,  that  the  most  of  the  laws  enacted  by  the  State 
Legislature  for  the  government  of  the  people  have  more  or  less  influence  upon 
the  action  of  the  Courts.  To  argue  with  or  try  to  convince  such  men  as  these 
is  simply  waste  of  breath.  To  earn  the  gratitude  of  the  people  and  carry  the 
irrigation  bills  through  to  a  successful  issue,  all  that  is  necessary  is  a  little 
patience,  something  of  a  firmness,  a  great  deal  of  attentive  silence  and  some 
solid  voting.  He  is  a  poor  friend  of  irrigation  who  cannot  give  a  few  days 
more  of  his  time  to  the  business  of  the  State.  A  vote  for  adjournment  is  a 
vote  against  irrigation. 

The  irrigators  have  it  in  their  power'' to  keep  the  Legislature  in  session 
until  the  irrigation  bills  are  reached  and  passed  upon,  and  it  ought  to  be 
done.  It  is  a  great  cause  and  should  not  be  abandoned  without  a  stubborn 
fight. 

Senator  Cross,  in  a  speech  in  opposition  to  the  irrigation  bills,  gave  utter- 
ance to  the  following  Christian  sentiment:  "Let  the  people  of  the  southern 
counties  and  their  representatives  feel  the  wrongs  we  have  felt,  may  they 
suffer  as  we  have  suffered,  and  may  the  God  who  distributes  his  sunshine 
equally  on  our  mountains  and  their  plains  hear  them  cry  in  vain  for  relief, 
until  they  award  uj|  that  mercy  they  themselves  claim."  There  is  just  one 
point  in  this  worthy  of  notice.  Senator  Cross  admits  that  the  irrigated 
counties  are  suffering  "wrongs,"  and  that  their  present  demands  are  for  re- 
lief from  conditions  of  extreme  hardship.  In  other  words,  Senator  Cross 
grants  the  justice  of  the  claims  of  the  irrigators,  but  opposes  any  concessions 
to  them. 

The  Call  thinks  that  California  ought  to  have  been  given  a  member  of  the 
Cabinet  because  her  growing  viticultural  industry  would  have  profited  by  hav- 
ing a  representative.  But  how  can  California  ask  consideration  from  the 
Federal  Government  for  interests  which  she  herself  treats  with  shameless  dis- 
regard? The  welfare  of  our  vineyards  in  half  of  the  fruit-growing  counties 
depends  on  irrigation,  and  the  State  Senate  vexatiously  delays  to  pass  the  nec- 
essary irrigation  laws,  and  threatens  to  adjourn  leaving  this  duty  unperformed. 
The  benefits  which  the  California  vineyardists  would  receive  from  having  a 
representative  in  Cleveland's  Cabinet  are  distant  and  speculative  compared 
with  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  a  Legislature  with  honesty  enough  to  re- 
spond to  the  obvious  wants  of  the  majority. 


S.  F.  Call. 
Crosg    Purpoges. 

The  very  able  Senator  from  Nevada  County  seems  to  have  mixed  together 
Iwo  entirely  separate  propositions,  viz:  that  to  authorize  the  construction  of 
dams  to  impound  debris  and  that  to  authorize  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation 


163 


purposes.  Mr.  Cross  finds  that  the  interdict  of  hydraulic  mining  has  worked 
considerable  hardships  upon  a  portion  of  his  constituents,  and  as  a  means  of 
getting  even,  he  opposed  the  irrigation  bills.  While  we  can  make  some  allow- 
ance for  a  Senator  who  goes  wron^,  on  a  proposition  that  his  immediate  cli- 
ents favor,  we  beg  leave  to  remark  that  statesmen  do  not  permit  a  local  inter- 
est to  warp  their  judgment  as  to  matters  of  State  or  national  policy.  The 
fact  that  hydraulic  mining  has  been  prohibited  on  account  of  the  destruction 
of  property  inseparable  from  its  prosecution  has  no  possible  connection  with 
the  proposition  to  authorize  the  appropriation  of  water  for  irrigation  pur- 
poses. Senator  Cross  appears  now  in  the  light  of  a  legislator  who  aided  to 
defeat  a  bill  he  might  under  other  circumstances  have  favored  in  order  to  pun- 
ish certain  other  legislators  for  not  supporting  his  own  pet  measure. 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Irrigfation    Bills    in    the     Senate. 

It  is  reported  from  Sacramento  that  the  Republican  Senators  have  taken 
united  party  action,  which  if  true  and  strictly  carried  out,  will  have  an  im- 
portant e£fect  upon  the  pending  irrigation  bills.  Their  future  coarse,  it  is 
said,  will  be  to  oppose  any  further  dilatory  practices  to  prevent  the  bills  from 
being  reached.  This,  if  report  be  true,  was  the  informal  conclusion  reached 
by  the  caucus  of  Republican  Senators.  But  it  is  stated  that,  in  the  same  con- 
ference, a  formal  understanding  was  reached  that  henceforth,  during  the  re- 
maining days  of  the  session,  they  will  refuse  to  take  up  any  bills  out  of  the  regu- 
lar order.  This  reported  formal  action  of  the  republican  caucus  may  not  be 
founded  on  fact,  or  it  may  be  that  it  is  only  intended  as  a  general  policy,  to  which 
an  exception  in  favor  of  the  irrigation  bills  will  be  permitted  to  be  made  by 
individual  members  f  ivoring  irrigation.  At  all  events,  if  this  action  has  been 
taken,  it  places  the  Republican  party  in  a  position  to  claim  that  the  bills  were 
defeated  by  Democratic  obstru.'-tionists,  if  any  Democrat  be  the  cause  of  delay. 
This  will  be  difficult  to  explain  away  before  the  people,  although  this  eleventh 
hour  Republican  concession  comes  too  late  to  permit  the  bills  being  reached 
in  the  regular  order.  And  here  is  the  opportunity  of  the  Democratic  party. 
If  every  Democratic  Senator  who  has  heretofore  opposed  the  bills  will  refrain 
from  dilatory  tactics;  if  he  will  go  a  step  further,  vote  to  take  up  the  bills  out 
of  the  regular  order,  and  bring  them  to  a  final  vote,  he  can,  while  reserving  his 
own  individual  judgment  as  to  the  wisdom  of  the  measures  now  proposed,  and 
indicating  it  in  his  vote  on  the  passage  of  the  bills,  render  the  party  good  ser- 
vice. Such  a  course  would  placo  the  Democratic  party  before  the  people  in 
batter  order  than  the  Republican  party,  if  the  latter  shall  refuse  to  consider 
these  bills  second  to  none  but  the  appropriation  bills.  It  would  be  better  for 
the  people  of  the  State  if  both  parties  were  in  full  accord  on  this  great  ques- 
tion; but  it  behooves  every  Democrat  of  the  Senate  to  place  the  position  of 
his  party  in  the  vanguard,  even  to  the  partial  sacrifice  of  his  private  opinions. 
A  Senator  who,  even  from  honest  conviction,  votes  against  the  irrigation  bills, 


164 


•will  find  it  difficult  to  satisfy  the  the  people  by  any  explanation  of  hiscourse^ 
But  a  Senator  who  prevents  a  final  vote,  or  contributes  to  such  an  event,  wilt 
make  explanation  impossible,  either  to  his  party  or  to  the  people. 


Sacramento  Record-Union. 

Tlie  Irriifation.  Problem. 

The  subject  of  irrigation  has  been  the  one  perplexing  question  before  the- 
Legislature.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  by  any  one  that  the  need  of  a  safe  system 
of  irrigation  is  a  great  one  in  many  sections  of  the  State.  In  establishing  such 
a  system,  however,  the  Legislature  has  found  itself  beset  by  two  apparently 
conflicting  interests,  technically  known  as  those  of  the  appropriators  and  the 
riparianists.  The  equities  of  each  have  been  freely  debated — we  may  say  too 
freely  discussed,  since  intemperate  heat  has  awakened  antagonisms  that 
should  not  be  stimulated.  We  have  believed,  and  do  believe,  that  the  Legisla* 
ture  would  have  been  nearer  a  wise  solution  of  the  problem  to-day  had  it  been 
badgered  less  by  passionate  debates  in  the  press  and  elsewhere.  It  is  a  ques- 
tion to  which  must  be  brought  the  calmest  deliberation  and  the  profoundest 
wisdom.  No  legislator  need  be  shamed  in  the  confession  that  it  is  perplexing, 
and  involved  in  doubt.  Its  final  settlement  must  be  the  result  of  concessions- 
and  compromises.  We  believe  these  all  possible,  and  that  the  interests  now 
at  war  may  be  adjusted  so  as  to  give  to  the  riparian  owner  for  his  needs,  and  to 
the  irrigator  a  just  quota  of  water;  or,  as  one  correspondent  has  suggested,  so 
to  merge  interests  as  to  distribute  the  water  with  a  due  regard  to  the  needs  of 
all.  We  are  perfectly  aware  that  to  accomplish  this  is  no  easy  task,  nor  will 
its  accomplishment  be  unattended  by  friction.  To  evolve  a  perfect  sys- 
tem at  once  is  not  possible,  but  by  wise  concessions  and  adjustments  an  ap-- 
proach  may  be  made  to  it.  The  use  of  water  to  the  stimulation  of  earth 
growth  must  be  made  as  broad  as  is  possibly  consistent  with  the  common, 
weal. 

There  have  been  in  public  debate  suggestions  made  and  plans  outlined  upon 
which  the  Legislature  might  have  grounded  the  basic  structure  for  a  system 
acceptable  to  the  people.  We  have  faith  that  this  will  be  done;  that  out  of  all 
this  contention  good  must  come;  that  the  waters  of  the  State  proper  to  be 
taken  for  irrigation  will  be  utilized  to  the  fullest  extent  in  increasing  produc- 
tion, and  that  we  will  secure  a  system  under  which  their  volume  may  be 
augmented  by  storage.  We  have  faith  in  the  right  solution  of  the  present 
problems  being  worked  out.  If  it  is  not  done  now  it  will  be  a  cause  for  pro- 
found regret.  The  whole  State  is  interests  in  the  founding  of  an  irrigation 
system  and  its  practical  working.  It  means  increased  population,  increased 
production,  increased  wealth,  decreased  taxation  and  full  development.  The 
whole  State  is  interested  in  so  building  the  system  that  no  man  shall  suffer 
irreparable  iujury,  and  that  the  greatest  good  possible  shall  accrue  to  thetr. 
largest  possible  number. 


165 

Modesto  Eepublican. 

The  Bnd. 

According  to  the  latest  news  from  Sacramento,  the  irrigationists  are  def eatedt 
in  the  Senate,  which  will,  in  all  probability,  put  an  end  to  the  irrigation  fight, 
for  this  session,  at  least.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  those  Senators  who 
have  opposed  irrigation  could  not  have  been  brought  to  book  and  forced  to 
place  themselves  on  the  record,  so  the  people  could  know  for  a  certainty  who 
they  are.  Bad  management  on  the  part  of  those  having  the  irrigation  bills  in 
charge,  in  the  Senate,  is  said  to  have  been  the  cause  of  the  disaster.  The 
vote  was  taken  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  consequently  no  roll  call  could  bo 
had;  hence  there  is  no  official  record  of  the  vote  by  name.  It  is  only  knowa 
that  there  were  13  votes  in  favor  of  reporting  favorably  on  the  bill,  and  17 
against  it.  Ten  refused,  absolutely,  to  vote  at  all,  and  as  there  can  be  no  roll 
call,  they  could  not  be  made  to  vote.    So  ends  practically  the  irrigation  fight. 


S.  F.  Examiner. 

The  Common  Law, 

It  has  been  satisfactorily  shown  that  the  common  law  of  England  was  in- 
tended to  be  adopted  in  this  State  only  so  far  as  applicable  to  our  condition, 
and  necessities.  The  courts,  in  settling  whether  or  not  any  given  portion  of 
the  common  law  is  to  stand  as  the  rule  of  decision  to  them,  must  ascertain- 
and  define  the  law,  and  also  determine  what  are  in  fact  our  condition  and 
necessities.  The  one  is  a  question  of  law,  and  the  other  a  question  of  fa3t» 
When  each  is  determined  the  courts  are  then  ready  to  form  their  conclusions 
as  to  the  applicability  of  the  law  to  the  fact.  It  is  no  invasion  of  the  rightful 
province  of  the  judiciary  for  the  people  to  assist  in  determining  the  fact.  No 
better  source  of  information  as  to  their  condition  and  wants  can  be  found 
than  the  people  collectively  speaking.  The  Legislature  represents  the  peo- 
ple, and  may  well  assume  to  speak  for  them.  The  common  law  relating  to 
riparian  rights  is  clearly  defined  by  the  Courts  so  that  it  (the  Legislature) 
may  easily  become  acquainted  with  it.  The  fact  that  the  portion  of  the  com- 
mon law  which  relates  to  riparian  rights,  as  it  is  claimed  to  be  administered 
in  England,  is  repugnant  to  and  inconsistent  with  the  climate,  topography, 
physical  condition  and  necessities  of  the  State  cannot  be  successfully  contro- 
verted. If  it  be  the  fact,  why  should  the  Legislature  not  so  declare?  While 
it  is  an  undoubted,  existing  fact,  many  of  the  Courts  have  refused  to  recognize 
it,  and  some,  among  them  the  Court  of  last  resort  of  »the  State,  have  yet  to 
finally  determine  the  question.  Such  a  declaration  is  contained  in  Section  2, 
of  Assembly  Bill  410.  It  is  not  an  ex  post  facto  declaration  of  law.  It  is  a  de- 
claratory assertion  that  the  fact  exists.  There  can  be  no  constitutional  objec- 
tion made  to  such  a  declaration.  If  the  Courts  see  fit  to  reject  it  as  evidence 
of  the  fact,  that  ends  the  matter.  But  it  seems  that  the  Judicial  Department 
of  the  Government  ought  to  give  great  weight  to  the  positive  assertion  mado 


166 


by  the  cliosen  representatives  of  the  sovereign  people,  that  irrigation  is  a 
climatic,  physical,  and  absolute  necessity  to  the  State.  Such  a  declaration 
cannot  result  in  harm,  and  may  avail  to  save  the  irrigating  sections  of  the 
State  from  thefatallydestructixeapplicationof  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights. 
The  intelligent  lawyers  in  the  Legislature  must  be  able  to  recognize  the  differ- 
•ence  between  an  ex  post  facto  declaration  of  law  and  a  legislative  affirmation 
of  an  existing  fact. 


The  Gait  Weekly  Gazette. 

Irrigfation  t8.  Riparianism. 

This  case  is  now  engaging  the  earnest  attention  of  the  whole  people  of 
California,  and  almost  the  entire  population  of  our  great  valleys  are  plaintiffs 
in  the  case.  Their  cause  is  a  just  one  and  popular  feeling  is  with  them.  No 
one,  though  saturated  with  the  law  of  riparian  ownership,  will  deny  that  the 
use  of  water  for  irrigating  purposes  on  the  great  plains  of  the  Sacramento 
and  San  Joaquin  valleys  is  a  beneficial  use.  No  one  will  deny  that  many  of 
the  dry  and  sterile  lands  of  these  regions,  now  unproductive  for  want  of  water, 
will,  by  its  use,  be  turned  into  green  and  refreshing  oases.  It  would  cover 
these  lands  with  a  new  growth  of  timber,  verdure,  gardens,  vineyards  and 
happy  homes.  The  gloomy,  uninviting  unproductive  desert  would  blossom 
with  life  and  vigor,  promise  and  plenty.  But  how  shall  all  this  be  done? 
The  riparian  owner  is  now  the  keeper  of  the  flood-gates  which,  if  opened, 
would  infuse  vigor  and  vitality  into  a  region  now  paralyzed  with  heat  and 
drought.  And  his  office  is  a  perpetual  one.  He  seems  to  have  a  vested  in- 
terest in  it  forever.  The  law  gave  it  to  him,  but  the  law  is  reluctant  to  take 
it  away.  The  common  law  of  England  and  the  Supreme  Court  of  our  own 
State  declares  in  favor  of  the  riparian  owner.  And  it  is  this  apparently  im- 
pregnable vested  right  of  a  comparatively  few  riparian  owners,  as  opposed  to 
the  thousands  now  famishing  for  water,  that  constitutes  one  of  the  most 
serious  and  profound  problems  of  the  age.  The  whole  water  question  re- 
solves itself  into  the  one  as  to  the  use  and  extent  of  the  use.  We  concede 
that  vested  rights  to  property  in  any  form  ought  not  to  be  lightly  taken  away; 
and  the  judgments  of  Courts  should  generally  remain  undisturbed.  But  the 
march  of  civilization  controls  all  law;  and  the  law  should  be  so  modified  and 
expanded  as  to  protect  the  millions  of  people  now  scattering  over  the  earth's 
surface.  They  cannot  all  be  riparian  owners;  they  cannot  all  look  upon  the 
sheen  of  running  waters;  they  cannot  all  sit  upon  their  own  doorsteps  and 
dip  their  drink  from  pellucid  streams.  The  chief  merit  of  the  common  law 
is  its  flexibility  and  adaptability  to  different  conditions  and  necessities;  and 
a  liberal  application  of  this  merit  should  be  made  in  California.  If  this  be 
impossible,  the  Legislature  ought  to  declare  the  use  of  water  for  purposes  of 
irrigation  to  be  a  public  use.  A  private  house  in  a  burning  city  may  be  law- 
fully destroyed  to  check  the  spread  of  the  conflagration.  Why  not  take,  with 
due  compensation,  the  riparian's  property,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  the 


167 


poverty,  want,  famine  and  devastation  which  is  sure  to  come  to  thousands  of 
families  unless  they  can  irrigate?  And  all  this  under  the  right  of  eminent 
domain. 


Los  Angeles  Daily  Times. 

Irrigfation,  Unpaid  Taxes  and  the  Railroads. 

In  an  interview  between  a  Times  reporter  and  Charles  Crocker,  President  of 
the  Southern  Pacific  Kailroad,  which  appeared  in  yesterday's  issue  of  this 
paper,  the  railroad  "magnet,"  being  asked,  "  What  do  you  think  of  the 
work  of  the  Legislature  ?"  replied  that  he  considered  the  action  of  the  Senate 
in  neglecting  to  pass  the  irrigation  bills  "an  outrage  upon  the  people."  Mr. 
Crocker  then  went  on  to  give  reason  for  his  opinion,  putting  himself  squarely 
on  record  as  being  in  full  sympathy  with  the  irrigationists,  and,  therefore, 
with  the  people  of  Southern  California  as  a  mass. 


The  Merced  Star. 

The  Modesto  Republican  says  the  latest  advices  from  Sacramento  indicate 
the  defeat  of  the  irrigationists,  which  will,  in  all  probability,  put  an  end  to 
the  irrigation,  for  this  session,  at  least.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that 
those  Senators  who  have  opposed  irrigation  could  not  have  been  brought  to 
book,  and  forced  to  place  themselves  on  the  record,  so  the  people  will  know 
for  a  certainty  who  they  are.  Bad  management  on  the  part  of  those  having 
;the  irrigation  bills  in  charge,  in  the  Senate,  is  said  to  have  been  the  cause  of 
the  disaster.  The  vote  was  taken  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  consequently 
no  roll  call  could  be  had;  hence  there  is  no  official  record  of  the  vote  by  name. 
It  is  only  known  that  there  were  13  votes  in  favor  of  reporting  favorably  on 
the  bill,  and  17  against  it.  Ten  refused  absoLitely  to  vote  at  all,  and  there 
being  no  roll  call  they  CDuld  not  be  m  ide  to  vote.  So  ends,  practic  dly,  the 
irrigation  fight. 


San  Francisco  Alta. 

Put  tKem  on  Record. 

Assembly  bill  410  is  the  key  to  the  irrigation  situation.  It  is  sheer  non- 
sense to  talk  about  irrigating  if  riparian  rights  according  to  the  English  law 
are  to  prevail  in  this  State.  Whether  it  be  finally  resolved  to  confirm  the 
doctrine  of  appropriation,  or  establish  some  other  system  of  distributing 
water  for  irri'^ation,  whatever  course  is  to  be  adopted,  the  riparian  doctrine 
stands  in  the  way.  Assembly  bill  410  proposes  to  break  down  this  barrier  to 
irrigation,  without  qualification  or  hesitation.  With  this  bill  once  on  the 
statute  books,  riparianism  becomes  a  thing  of  the  past,  and  in  no  other  way 
can  any  system  of  irrigation  obtain  a  sure  foothold  in  the  State.  The  resist- 
-aace  to  the  passage  of  this  bill  is  not  so  strong  in  number  as  to  defeat  it,  if  a 


168 

vote  could  be  had.  The  strength  of  the  opposition  lies  in  their  power  to  pre- 
vent action.  If  the  bill  fails  of  passage  at  this  session,  it  will  come  up  at  the 
next.  The  people  are  for  it.  They  will  elect  to  the  next  Legislature  those 
whom  they  believe  to  be  its  friends,  and  they  will  defeat  its  known  enemies. 
The  Assembly  is  already  upon  the  record.  The  Senate  has  yet  to  declare  it- 
self, by  a  yea  and  nay  vote,  upon  any  direct  question  which  absolutely  draws 
the  line  between  the  friends  of  the  bill  and  its  enemies.  The  bill  is  now  on 
the  general  file  of  the  Senate.  Ahead  of  it  on  the  file  there  is  no  measure  that 
comes  within  gunshot  of  being  of  as  vital  importance.  There  is  no  excuse 
for  not  taking  it  up  out  of  its  order  and  ahead  of  all  other  bills.  A  motion  to 
this  effect  would  reveal  its  certain  enemies.  If  such  a  motion  was  carried,  it 
would  be  certain,  with  proper  managemeat,  to  reach  a  vote  where  every 
Senator  would  be  forced  to  array  himself  positively  on  one  side  or  the  other. 
The  irrigation  leaders  must  force  such  a  vote.  The  people  must  not  be  left 
in  the  dark,  lest  they  panish  the  innocent  as  the  guilty. 

There  is  no  necessity  for  an  extra  session  of  the  Legislature.  The  irrigation- 
bills  and  all  other  necessary  legislation  can  be  passed  if  the  regular  session 
is  continued  a  few  days.  The  members  will  have  to  serve  without  pay,  but 
what  of  that?  They  have  not  done  their  work  yet,  and  should  be  glad  of  the 
opportunity  to  stay  and  finish  it,  even  at  the  cost  of  a  little  personal  incon- 
venience. 


Fresno  Expositor. 

So  far  there  is  no  riparian  diflaculties  in  Merced  County.  The  West  Side- 
canals  take  the  water  from  the  San  Joaquin  river,  and  although  in  exception- 
ally dry  seasons,  about  all  the  water  of  that  stream  is  turned  into  the  canal, 
there  have  been  no  complaints  from  the  riparian  owners  below  the  place  of 
diversion.  The  Merced  river  furnishes  an  abundance  of  water  in  early  sum- 
mer. The  water  taken  from  this  stream  by  the  present  canal  even  at  low 
stages  of  the  river  is  sufficient  to  irrigate  and  insure  permanent  fertility  to  a 
large  area  of  land.  Merced  has  one  advantage  over  counties  lying  further 
south — there  is  no  present  or  prospective  litigation  over  water  rights.  So  says 
the  Merced  Star.  The  Expositor  opines  that  as  soon  as  Merced  county  gets 
its  irrigating  canals  in  effective  shape,  some  "dog-in-the-manger"  dwelling  on 
the  banks  of  its  streams  will  step  out  and  demand  that  the  water  shall  fLo'W 
by  his  domains  that  he  may  listen  to  its  murmur. 


San  Diego  Sun. 

It  is  believed  that  the  irrigation  obstructionists  in  the  Senate  will  succeed 
in  preventing  action  being  taken  on  irrigation  bills  during  the  present  ses- 
sion. It  is  thought,  however,  that  if  the  sixty  Assemblymen  on  whom  the 
irrigationists  rely  will  sign  a  petition  to  the  Governor  asking  for  an  extra 
session,  agreeing  that  no  constructive  mileage  will  be  charged,  and  that  the 


169 


session  will  not  be  extended  longer  than  ten  days,  the  Governor  will  acced&< 
to  the  request. 

San  Francisco  Examiner. 

The  Railroad  Irrigation  Bill. 

Senator  Whitney  claims  that  his  bill,  "to  declare  the  title  to  water  inrivers^. 
streams,  lakes,  and  ponds,  and  the  right  to  its  use,"  is  the  result  of  much 
study,  and  of  a  sincere  desire  to  oflFer  a  solution  of  the  vexed  problems.  He 
assumes  that,  after  all  the  discussion  that  has  taken  place,  he  is  convinced 
"that  the  key  to  the  intricacies  of  the  situation  will  be  found  in  his  Senate 
Bill,  No.  50.  He  would  be  right  in  his  theory  if,  in  all  sections  of  the  State,, 
where  irrigation  is  carried  on,  or  is  a  necessity,  the  streams  carried  water 
enough  to  irrigate  all  irrigable  lands  and  to  supply  all  other  uses  to  which 
water  may  be  applied.  It  is  unfortunate  for  the  State  that  this  theory  is  not. 
founded  on  fact.  It  is  because  the  water  supply  is  at  the  present  time  insuffi- 
cient for  all  that  the  existing  controversy  over  the  use  of  water  has  arisen. 
Senator  Whitney's  bill  proposes  that  all  shall  have  water,  for  all  purposes, 
out  of  the  running  streams.  This  is  not  possible.  The  problem  is  how  to 
distribute  the  waters  of  the  streams  so  as  to  confer  the  greatest  good  on  the 
greatest  number  without  violating  justice,  and  to  apply  such  waters  to  abso- 
lute necessities.  If  there  be  any  flowing  waters  of  streams  now  put  to  uses 
which  can  be  supplied  from  any  other  source,  such  uses  as  cannot  be  other- 
wise supplied  should  be  given  preference  in  the  disposition  of  the  streams* 
Now,  it  can  be  demonstrated  beyond  dispute  that  water  for  sustaining  life, 
for  domestic  and  sanitary  uses,  and  for  the  watering  of  stock,  which  are  pre- 
ferred over  irrigation  by  Senate  Bill  No.  50,  can  be  obtained  in  other  ways, 
than  from  the  natural  streams.  It  can  be  shown  with  equal  certainty  that 
water  for  irrigation  cannot  be  otherwise  obtained.  Such  being  the  fact,  how 
can  any  one  contend  that  irrigation  should  not  be  given  the  preference  over 
the  other  uses  mentioned?  It  would  take  a  volume  to  go  through  Senator 
Whitney's  bill,  and  show  the  disastrous  effect  which  it  would  have  if  put  into 
practical  operation.  Theoretically,  nothing  could  be  more  just.  But  if  the 
only  theory  upon  which  it  could  operate  successfully,  and  with  justice  to  all, 
were  based  upon  facts  which  have  an  existence,  the  bitter  controversy  over 
water  rights  in  the  Legislature  and  in  the  courts  could  never  have  ariscTi. 
Does  not  the  unanimous  opposition  of  every  practical  irrigator  in  the  State 
familiar  with  the  sources  of  our  water  supply  convince  thinking  men  that, 
whatever  may  have  been  Mr.  Whitney's  intentions  in  the  premises,  his  bill 
cannot  promote  irrigation?    It  is  a  misnomer  to  call  this  an  irrigation  bill. 

Senator  Whitney  is  also  reported  as  saying  that,  so  far  as  he  has  been  in- 
formed, the  interests  of  the  railroad  corporations  are  considered  by  them  as 
identical  with  the  irrieiators,  and  thai  he  has  never  seen  from  them,  or  from 
any  one  acting  in  their  behalf,  the  least  indication  of  hostility  to  the  interests, 
of  irrigation.     If  the  railroad  company  favor  this  bill,  it  is  certainly  a  very 


170 

unmistakable  evidence  of  their  hostility  to  irrigation.  The  bill,  as  framed, 
•certainly  enables  them  to  pursue  their  usual  and  unerring  course  toward 
the  people's  interests.  Tbey  have  never  failed,  on  any  great  public  question, 
to  meet  the  public  with  a  smile  and  stab  it  under  the  fifth  rib.  They  have  in 
their  hire  attorneys  by  the  dozen,  who  are  practiced  in  framing  laws  purport- 
ing to  mean  one  thing  and  actually  effecting  another.  The  Whitney  bill  is  of 
this  class. 


Mendocino  Dispatch  Democrat. 

Irrigation  in  California,  is  a  problem  that  must  be  solved,  but  the  Repub- 
lican Legislature  of  to-day  is  not  equal  to  the  emergency.  There  is  not  a 
spot  of  land  in  the  dry  plains  of  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys, 
nor  in  the  whole  of  Southern  California,  but  can  be  made  to  yield  bounti- 
fully for  the  support  of  man  by  the  free  use  of  water,  but  laws  must  be  pass- 
ed whereby  its  use  can  be  governed  and  regulated,  and  the  rights  of  the  more 
enterprising  citizens  protected.  The  subject  of  irrigation  is  one  of  the  lead- 
ing issues  that  will  engross  the  minds  of  our  thinking  leading  men  for  many 
years,  and  when  laws,  which,  at  first,  must  be  of  a  crude  and  imperfect 
nature,  shall  be  perfected  so  that  the  greatest  good  will  or  can  be  accom- 
plished, this  State  will  have  entered  upon  a  period  of  unprecedented  pros- 
perity. 

Daily  Evening  Expositor. 

The  California  Senate  found  sufficient  time  to  pass  a  bill  to  pay  John 
Wilkins  (colored),  of  San  Francisco,  $500  for  a  $40  horse  that  he  carelessly 
drove  into  a  hole  on  the  water-front,  but  it  has  not  yet  been  able  to  find  time 
to  pass  any  of  the  irrigation  bills.  John  Wilkins'  horse  was  probably  more 
nearly  within  the  scope  of  the  comprehension  of  the  majority  of  the  Senators, 


San  Francisco  Examiner. 

The  liegislatnre. 

The  Legislature  now  convened  at  Sacramento  has  fairly  earned  the  reputa- 
tion of  being  the  worst  and  most  reckless  which  has  ever  assembled.  This 
statement,  to  those  who  remember  what  some  of  the  California  Legislatures 
have  been,  may  seem  harsh,  but  it  is  nevertheless  true.  Every  measure  of 
the  railroad  monopoly  has  been  railroaded  through  without  much  friction, 
and  with  the  speed  of  an  express  train.  The  railroad  has  had  everything  and 
the  people  nothing.  Men  heretofore  considered  honest  have  fallen  by  the 
wayside.  The  treasury  has  been  raided  unscrupulously;  the  people's  money 
voted  away  in  the  shape  of  appropriation  bills  with  unprecedented  prodigality; 
irrigation  measures  which  every  one  recognizes  of  supreme  importance  have 
■been  kept  back  by  the  railroad  manipulators,  in   order  that  their  own  pet 


171 


measures  miglit  be  forced  on  the  people.  The  necessity  for  irrigation  legis-> 
lation  is  apparent  to  all.  The  right  to  appropriate  water,  not  only  for  agri- 
cultural, but  for  mining  purposes,  is  absolutely  necessary  to  thousands  and 
tens  of  thousands  of  people.  Orchards  which  are  now  furnishing  fruit  that 
renders  California  famous;  vineyards  which  are  producing  our  best  wines  and 
raisins,  and  mines  in  the  mining  districts  in  the  State  depend  upon  and  can- 
not be  conducted  without  the  use  of  water.  There  are  towns  and  settlements 
all  over  the  State  which  will  be  depopulated  unless  this  water  question  is  set* 
tied.  Meetings  of  the  people  have  been  held  on  the  subject,  and  petitions 
have  been  poured  in  upon  the  legislators  begging  for  relief.  But  the  legisla- 
tive ears,  attuned  to  monopoly  music,  have  been  deaf  to  the  appeals  of  the 
people.  The  constitutional  limit,  so  far  as  pay  to  the  legislators  is  concerned, 
has  expired.  Exactly  how  a  majority  of  the  legislators  are  now  making  their 
expenses  it  is  not  necessary  to  discuss.  A  scrutiny  of  the  bills  which  have 
passed,  and,  indeed,  of  the  entire  conduct  of  the  majority  of  the  legislators^ 
will  suggest  many  reasons  why  they  prefer  remaining  at  Sacramento  to  re- 
turning home  and  facing  their  constituents.  There  are  some  men  in  this 
Legislature  who  have  made  good  records,  but  the  majority  of  them  are  well 
advised  in  desiring  to  linger  at  the  State  Capital  and  prolong  their  official 
lives.  The  people  will  see  hereafter  that  they  will  never  be  returned  to. 
misrepresent  them. 


San  Francisco  Alta. 

Benefit  of  the  Doubt. 

Several  Senators  are  devoting  their  energies  to  the  full  capacity  to  show 
that  the  irrigation  bills  are  unconstitutional — especially  Assembly  bill  410. 
There  are  lawyers  of  the  Senate  equally  as  able  as  any  opponent  of  the  bills 
who  maintain  their  constitutionality.  It  seems  fair  to  say  that  such  a  conflict 
of  opinion  gives  rise  to  a  reasonable  doubt  in  favor  of  the  bills.  Other  Sen- 
ators, even  though  they  be  lawyers,  might  take  the  wise  and  public  spirited 
attitude  attributed  to  Senator  Johnson  of  Sonoma,  and  give  the  people  the 
benefit  of  the  doubt.  These  Senators  who  assert  that  there  is  no  question 
but  that  portions  of  the  bills  are  beyond  a  doubt  unconstitutional,  when 
construed  literally  to  their  full  extent,  lay  themselves  open  to  the  charge, 
made  by  some,  that  their  assertions  are  not  made  in  good  faith,  when  they 
pursue  a  course  which  prevents  the  Senate  from  deciding  whether  or  not  the 
bills  are  to  become  laws,  either  in  whole  or  in  part.  The  people  of  this  State 
feel  so  strongly  on  this  irrigation  question  that  it  is  almost  certain  that,  in 
the  event  of  failure  to  pass  even  a  single  bill,  any  obstructionist  or  any  op- 
ponent to  the  bills  who  goes  again  to  the  people  will  be  told  that  they  want 
no  more  representatives  who  cannot  sacrifice  technical  notions  to  the  sover- 
eign will  and  the  public  necessity.  They  will  be  told  that  to  whatever  ex- 
tent any  of  these  bills  are  unconstitutional  the  Courts  of  the  United  States 
afford  full  protection.    The  Legislature  ought,  without  hesitation,  to  go  to. 


172 

^he  very  fullest  constitutional  limit  in  this  legislation  for  the  benefit  of  irri- 
gation. Let  the  Courts  mark  the  line  where  the  constitutional  ends  and  the 
unconstitutional  begins. 

Stockton  Herald. 

A  San  Joaquin  Petition. 

The  following  petition  relating  to  irrigation  was  laid  upon  the  desk  of 
Senators  Langford  and  Baldwin  to-day:  '^To  Senators  Baldwin  and  Langford 
of  San  Joaquin  County:  The  undersigned  business  men  of  Stockton,  request 
you  to  support  and  vote  for  the  irrigation  bills  now  pending  in  the  Senate, 
introduced  by  Senator  Reddy,  being  the  same  as  Assembly  bills  440,  171  and 
170,  and  the  amendment  to  the  water  clause  in  the  Constitution,  and  to  do 
all  in  your  power  to  secure  their  enactment  at  this  session  of  the  Legislature, 
and  without  further  delay.  We  ask  this  because  we  believe  those  bills 
having  the  approval  of  the  committee  from  the  State  Irrigation  Convention, 
and  being  favored  by  the  people  of  Southern  California,  are  necessary  to  the 
prosperity  of  that  portion  of  the  State  upon  which  the  trade  and  commercial 
importance  of  Stockton  is  largely  dependent.  Signed,  Moore  &  Smith,  J.  D. 
Peters,  H.  W.  Weaver,  J.  M.  Welch,  Wm.  H.  Woodbridge,  and  sixty-two 
others." 


Tulare  Register. 

We  trust  that  the  members  of  the  present  State  Senate  will  exhibit  a  degree 
■of  common  sense,  be  it  ever  so  little,  that  will  enable  them  to  see  the  neces- 
sity of  expunging  from  our  laws  every  trace  of  the  pernicious  and  selfish 
doctrine  of  riparian  rights  as  construed  by  our  courts. 


Vallejo  Evening  Chronicle. 

It  begins  to  look  as  if  the  irrigation  legislation  prayed  for  by  the  people  of 
the  southern  part  of  the  State  will  fizzle  out  in  the  Senate.  The  Assembly 
passed  the  bills  in  the  shape  asked  for,  but  the  Senate  has  added  amend- 
ments which  will  make  the  bill  obnoxious  to  the  irrigators  themselves.  It 
will  be  a  great  blow  to  the  southern  part  of  the  country  if  the  measures  fail 
of  passage  or  are  loaded  down  witfi  unfriendly  amendments. 


Anaheim  Gazette. 

Irrigation  measures  go  on  swimmingly  in  the  Assembly.  The  bill  provid- 
ing for  the  discovery  and  adjudication  of  water  rights  and  claims  passed  the 
Assembly  by  a  vote  of  53  to  10.  The  bill  providing  for  the  organization  and 
•control  of  water  and  irrigation  districts  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  51  to  11. 
The  constitutional  amendment,  which  is  part  of  the  irrigation  legislation, 
-was  passed  by  a  vote  of  56  to  13.    The  gist  of  these  bills  was  published  in  the 


173 


Gazette  some  weeks  ago.  But  it  is  barely  possible  that  the  bills  will  be 
wrecked  in  the  Senate,  in  which  body  the  riparian  proprietors  have  some 
conspicuously  able  advocates,  and  they  may,  by  parliamentary  methods  of 
obstruction,  defeat  all  irrigation  legislation.  The  pay  of  the  Legislature 
stops  in  a  few  days,  and  it  may  adjourn. 


i 


Stockton  Independent. 

A  Black  Eye  for  Irri(;ation. 

The  Kiparianists  appear  to  have  the  upper  hand  of  the  Irrigationists  in  the 
Senate.  Last  night's  dispatches  say  the  Legislature  will  adjourn  before  the 
irrigation  bills  can  be  agreed  upon  by  the  Seriate,  and  the  only  hope  for  their 
passage  lies  in  the  possibility  of  an  extra  session  for  that  purpose.  It  is 
hardly  probable  an  extra  session  will  be  called.  This  fight  of  the  riparianists 
has  not  been  conducted  with  a  particle  of  fairness.  The  Senators  enlisted 
against  the  irrigation  bills  have  not  met  the  issue  squarely,  or  with  any  evi- 
dence that  they  were  willing  to  have  the  controversy  settled  in  a  just  and 
equitable  way.  They  have  resorted  to  obstruction  proceedings  that  were 
only  a  bald  pretence  for  judicial  consideration,  and  will  receive,  as  they 
merit,  widespread  condemnation. 

Modesto  Eepublican. 

Their  Record. 

The  water  and  land  monopolists  appear  to  have  it  all  their  own  way  in 
the  Senate.  "What  with  bad  management  on  the  part  of  the  friends  (?)  of 
irrigation,  and  the  unfairness  of  the  obstructionists,  and  other  sufficient  and 
weighty  reasons,  irrigation  legislation  is  doomed,  for  this  season,  at  least. 
The  Democracy  have  at  all  tiqjes  claimed  to  be  the  anti-monopoly  party,  par 
excellence.  The  Senate  is  Democratic;  the  Assembly  is  Eepublican.  The 
Democratic  party  charges  the  Republican  party  with  favoring  monopoly? 
The  Assembly  passed  the  irrigation  bills  by  large  majorities.  The  Senate 
defeated  those  same  bills.  Now,  in  view  of  these  facts,  by  what  right  does 
the  Democracy  arrogate  to  themselves  the  title  of  anti-monopoly  party? 
The  only  real  monopoly  that  can  exist  is  the  monopoly  of  water  and  land, 
and  here  we  have  the  strange  spectacle  of  an  anti-monopoly  Democratic 
Senate  standing  in  with  the  water  and  land  monopoly  as  against  the  people  of 
the  State. 

The  tactics  resorted  to  by  the  obstructionists  in  the  Senate  is  such  that  a 
vote  by  a  call  of  the  roll  cannot  be  had;  hence  the  names  of  those  Senators 
who  voted  against  irrigation  cannot  be  known  officially.  But  the  people  will 
remember  that  the  Senate  is  Democratic,  and  in  that  body  irrigation  was  de- 
feated; thus  placing  the  Democratic  party  on  the  record  as  the  friend  of  the 
land  and  water  monopolists.  This  record  they  cannot  dodge,  and  the  party 
will  be  called  upon  to  face  the  music  at  future  elections. 


174 
Kern  County  Californian. 

Fiction  and  Fact. 

When  the  riparian  attorneys  in  the  Legislature  picture  the  deplorable  con- 
dition of  the  old  pioneer  riparian-like  Senator  Cox  and  Miller  and  Lux,  who 
in  an  early  day,  built  his  residence  on  the  banks  of  some  charming  river,  and 
created  a  garden  of  delight  around  him,  should  the  irrigation  bills  become 
laws  and  his  right  to  have  this  river  flow  past  his  premises  be  condemned 
and  he  paid  for  it  in  order  that  it  may  be  brought  out  of  its  deep  channel  on 
to  the  adjoining  arid  plain  and  used  for  irrigation — his  home  destroyed,  life 
blasted,  etc. — the  answer  is,  although  it  has  never  been  made  in  the  proper 
quarter: 

There  is  not  a  man  settled  on  the  bank  of  a  stream  in  Southern  California 
who  is  not  an  appropriator  and  irrigator,  and  there  is  not  a  man  so  living  in 
that  part  of  the  State  who  is  not  either  a  friend  of,  or  at  least,  not  an  oppo- 
nent, of  the  irrigation  bills.  As  far  as  the  streams  of  Southern  California  are 
of  any  benefit  in  the  way  of  fertilizing  the  soil,  flowing  in  their  natural  chan- 
nels, the  riparian  proprietor  might  as  well  live  twenty  miles  away.  But  let  it 
be  supposed,  as  the  riparian  attorneys  state,  that  the  land  of  the  riparian  pro- 
prietor is  moistened  and  fertilized  by  the  stream  flowing  in  the  natural  chan- 
nel, and  that,  taking  advantage  of  this  circumstance,  he  had  created  a  Gar- 
den of  Eden,  and  his  right  to  have  this  stream  even  condemned  for  a  greater 
■Qse — to  be  brought  upon  the  surface  and  used  to  irrigate  and  fertilize  a  wider 
area,  would  not  the  same  right  still  remain  to  this  riparian  that  every  other 
member  of  the  community  enjoyed?  He  would  have  the  right  of  appropri- 
ation. He  could  connect  with  the  canal  that  diverted  the  stream  and  irrigate 
as  his  neighbors  would  do.  The  danger  of  his  land  being  made  desolate 
even  under  this  given  state  of  facts,  which  has  no  existence  in  reality,  is  a 
mere  idle  figment  of  the  brain.  There  are  no  riparians  in  the  sense  of 
opposing  these  bills  except  Hon.  Fred.  Cox  and  Miller  &  Lux,  all  of  them 
large  appropriators  of  water  and  irrigators,  who  own  lands  at  the  ends  of  or 
sinks  of  the  streams  in  the  Tulare  Valley,  and  under  the  riparian  law,  as 
there  is  nobody  and  no  stream  below  them,  expect  to  blackmail  everybody 
above  them.  Should  opportunity  be  given  them  to  do  this,  it  would  be  worth 
to  them  millions  of  dollars  per  annum. 

The  following  item  from  the  Yisalia  Fret  Press,  furnished  by  a  Traver  cor- 
respondent, is  suggestive.  It  shows  that  Senator  Cox,  while  opposing  irriga- 
tion in  one  direction,  where  he  thinks  it  accords  with  his  views  of  interest,  in 
another  where  he  thinks  he  is  safe  from  the  doctrine  of  riparianism  that  he 
invokes,  that  he  is  an  irrigator.    The  Press  says: 

Clark  &  Cox  are  putting  in  the  old  "Williams  field  of  9,000  acres  to  grain 
and  alfalfa;  about  2,000  acres  will  be  devoted  to  the  latter.  They  have  let 
the  contract  for  building  side  ditches  to  irrigate  the  whole  tract,  and  the 
water  will  soon  be  on  all  parts  of  the  farm  if  needed. 


175 
Sacramento  Capital. 

Wliere  the  Regpongibility  Will  Rest. 

The  Republican  Assembly  has  passed  the  irrigation  bills  by  overwhelming 
majorities,  and  they  are  now  before  the  Democratic  Senate  under  so-called  con- 
sideration. This  latter  body  is  proceeding  with  a  slowness  and  deliberation 
supposed  to  be  a  peculiarity  of  the  august  Senatorial  dignity,  but  which,  con- 
sidering the  shortness  of  the  session,  if  continued  means  the  defeat  of  the 
bills.  For  some  weeks  these  bills  have  been  a  special  order  daily  in  Com- 
mittee of  the  Whole,  yet  practically  only  the  first  section  of  the  first  bill  has 
been  considered.  This  delay,  in  view  of  the  magnitude  of  the  interests  requir- 
ing this  legislation,  can  scarcely  be  too  severely  condemned.  "Why  is  it  these 
gentlemen  are  so  afraid  of  recording  their  votes  on  this  question,  for  to  judge 
by  the  words  of  the  members  gravely  offering  amendments  in  good  faith,  they 
all  acknowledge  the  necessity  of  and  favor  the  proposed  legislation.  It  is 
absurd  to  say  that  forty  minds  cannot  reach  an  agreement  as  readily  and 
surely  as  eighty,  unless  it  be  that  they  do  not  want  to.  Possibly  there  may 
be  some  Senators  who  believe  that  by  smothering  this  legislation  by  parlia- 
mentary tactics  they  will  escape  the  political  consequences  of  their  act.  We 
would  assure  them  that  this  is  a  vain  and  delusive  hope,  for  every  one  of 
them,  open  enemy  or  false  friend,  is  marked  and  will  be  remembered  by 
the  public  when  they  apply  for  further  political  favors.  The  question  is  not 
a  political  one  in  any  sense,  nor  a  sectional  one,  yet  it  cannot  but  prove  det- 
rimental to  the  Democratic  party  if  the  Senate,  controlled  by  it,  oppose  itself 
to  the  legislation  demanded  by  the  great  material  interests  of  the  State. 


San  Francisco  Post. 

Irrigation.— Ho-iv  tbe    Railroad    stands    on    tlie    Q,uestion.  — Interesting^ 

Interview  with  Colonel  C.  F.  Crocker,  —He  Talks  Right  Out 

in    Meeting. — Solid    Railroad    Interests. 

Having  exhausted  other  subjects  of  attack,  the  unfairly  rabid  anti-railroad 
press  and  politicians  are  now  protesting  loudly  that  the  railroad  company — 
meaning  the  Central  Pacific  Railroad,  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  and  allies — 
is  endeavoring  to  kill  the  irrigation  bill.  People  who  have  followed  the  course 
of  the  Legislature  cannot,  of  course,  be  deceived  by  so  bald  a  falsehood;  but 
there  are  those  who  will  accept  any  uncontradicted  statement  as  true,  and 
lest  they  be  deceived  in  this  matter,  it  is  necessary  to  state  the  true  facts  of 
the  case.  A  Post  reporter  called  on  C.  F.  Crocker,  Vice  President  and  Di- 
rector of  the  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  and  Central  Pacific  Railroad,  to-day, 
and  asked  him  point  blank  if  the  railroad  company  was  in  any  way  opposed 
to  the  passage  of  a  bill  protecting  the  irrigators  of  this  State  in  the  appro- 
priation and  beneficial  use  of  water. 

"  We  favor  irrigation  all  the  time,  and  these  wild  statements  that  we  are 
opposed  to  necessary  legislation  to  secure  the  use  of  water  to  irrigators  are 
12 


176 


utterly  false  and  malicious, "replied  Mr.  Crocker,  with  some  warmth.  "These 
charges  of  interference  on  our  part  to  prevent  the  passage  of  the  irrigation 
bill  are  made  for  a  purpose.  They  are  made  to  prejudice  the  people  against 
us  and  to  keep  alive  the  agitation  which  has  been  made  in  the  interest  of  a 
few  selfish  politicians,  and  which  has  retarded  the  extension  of  railroad 
building  in  this  State,  has  kept  out  capital  by  its  hostile  attitude  towards 
public  improvement,  and  has  indirectly  resulted  in  the  loss  of  large  and 
important  trade  to  this  State." 

•'Will  you  state  the  exact  position  of  the  railroad  company  on  the  iniga- 
tion  question?" 

"Certainly  I  will,  and  I  can  speak  advisedly,  for  the  subject  has  been 
much  discussed  by  our  executive  department.  We  are  in  favor  of  the  widest 
possible  use  of  water  for  irrigation,  and  heartily  in  accord  with  the  sense  of 
the  Fresno  irrigation  Convention.  It  does  seem  to  me  that  it  should  be  un- 
necessary for  any  one  to  ask  our  position  on  this  matter,  but  our  enemies  are 
so  unfair,  so  disingenuous,  so  regardless  of  truth  in  their  anxiety  to  foment 
a  popular  feeling  against  us,  that  they  will  even  run  the  risk  of  making 
charges  against  us  as  false  on  their  face  as  any  statement  could  be,  and  which 
■will  not  stand  for  an  instant,  if  the  light  of  our  self-interest  and^  the  record 
of  our  friends  is  applied." 

"  "You  speak  of  self-interest.  What  interest  has  your  company  in  irri- 
gation?" 

"A  greater  interest  than  any  other  man  or  set  of  men — greater,  in  fact, 
than  all  other  interests.  We  run  and  operate  the  S.  P.  B.  R.,  a  railroad 
2,300  miles  long.  That  2,300  miles  of  road  would  not  pay  enough  to  keep 
the  tracks  in  repair  but  for  irrigation.  Look  at  the  territory  it  traverses, 
starting  from  the  bay  line.  There  is  Stanislaus  County,  with  millions  of 
acres  of  dry  land,  now  assessed  at  $1  per  acre,  which  is  worth  $100  an  acre 
as  soon  as  water  is  put  on  it.  Why,  in  Merced  County  alone,  my  father  and 
myself  and  a  few  other  members  of  the  company,  have  spent  over  a  million 
dollars  on  an  irrigating  canal,  with  which  we  expect  to  irrigate  170,000  acres 
of  land,  and  increase  the  taxable  value  of  the  county  at  least  $16,830,000  as 
soon  as  the  water  is  flowing.  We  will  probably  spend  half  a  million  more,  for 
the  canal  is  a  huge  undertaking,  and  the  water  has  to  be  carried  over  and 
through  a  range  of  mountains.  Now  that  water  is  running  to  waste  in  a 
swamp  so  full  of  malaria  that  human  beings  can  only  live  there  a  few  months 
in  the  year,  but  when  our  ditch  is  completed  the  swamp  land  can  be  tilled 
and  the  dry  land  will  yield  marvelous  crops.  We  have  land  to  sell  there,  and 
our  railroad  will  carry  its  produce.  What  stronger  interest  could  any  set  of 
men  have  in  irrigation  than  that?  Why,  since  our  ditch  was  started  real  es- 
tate in  Merced  City  has  gone  up  100  per  cent,  in  value,  and  our  shipments 
from  that  city  have  more  than  doubled.  Take,  for  example,  the  next  county — 
Fresno.  Where  once  was  a  desert — on  land  which  our  company  sold  for  less 
than  a  dollar  an  acre — there  are  now  dozens  of  irrigated  colonies,  worth  from 
$150  to  $400  per  acre.     Settlement  is  close  and  healthy,  the  plain  is  dotted 


k 


177 


with  towns  and  villages,  all  of  which  yield  a  profit  to  our  road.  Should  we 
work  to  kill  that  interest  and  relegate  the  laud  to  an  occasional  grazing  ground 
on  which  cattle  will  range  that  can  be  driven  to  market,  and  will  not  pay  our 
road  a  cent  in.  freight.  It  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  we  would  cut  our 
throats  in  that  manner,  yet  these  enemies  of  ours  would  have  the  people  so 
believe.  Look  at  the  next  county — Tulare — with  its  million  and  a  half  of 
acres  irrigated  and  producing  an  average  of  thirty-five  bushels  to  the  acre, 
every  bushel  of  which,  except  the  little  used  in  the  county,  has  to  come  over 
our  road  one  way  or  the  other.  That  whole  country  depends  on  irrigation, 
and  think  you  the  railroad  would  be  the  one  to  attempt  to  convert  it  into 
'  poor  pasture  land,. ' 

"  Look  at  the  country  south  of  Tulare.  It  all,  except  some  small  portion, 
depends  on  irrigation.  What  would  Arizona  and  New  Mexico  be  without 
artificial  irrigation?  It  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  we  could  fight  our  own  in- 
terests by  opposing  irrigation.  We  favor  it  in  every  way,  and  are  prepared 
to  make  sacrifices  to  insure  its  perpetuation.  We  would  be  willing  to  pay  in- 
creased assessments  if  money  was  needed  for  reimbursing  vested  rights.  I 
have  had  conversations  with  Mr.  Shorb,  the  head  of  the  irrigation  movement, 
and  he  can  testify  that  we  are  in  full  accord  with  his  plans,  and  even  while  I 
was  in  New  Orleans  I  telegraphed  to  our  land  agents  to  do  all  in  their  power 
to  further  the  popular  cause.  Call  it  selfish  interest,  if  you  will,  but  what- 
ever you  choose  to  call  it  the  fact  remains,  we  are  heartily  in  favor  of  irriga- 
tion, as  opposed  to  riparian  rights.  If  there  was  any  reason  for  this  attack 
upon  us,  I  would  not  complain,  but  there  is  no  reason  at  all.  They  have 
charged  that  some  members  of  the  Senate,  whom  they  class  as  our  friends, 
have  voted  against  the  bill.  Suppose  that  was  true,  does  it  make  us  respon- 
sible? Because  a  Senator  votes  to  give  the  railroad  fair,  or  even  favorable, 
treatment  on  one  subject,  that  does  not  prove  this  company  owns  him  and  is 
responsible  for  him. 

It  is  absurd  on  the  face,  and  an  insult  to  every  man  in  the  Legislature  to 
make  such  a  suggestion.  There  is  not  a  gentleman  at  Sacramento  who  has 
not  at  one  time  or  another  voted  in  favor  of  what  are  called  railroad  measures. 
Let  me  cite  an  instance:  A  certain  Senator  votes  for  what  is  known  as  a  rail- 
road bill.  He  also  votes  for  the  fireman's  bill.  What  would  be  thought  if 
the  foreign  insurance  companies  set  up  the  claim  that  the  railroad  was  active 
to  have  foreign  companies  taxed?  Why,  tha  suggestion  would  be  laughed  at. 
We  have  enough  business  of  our  own  to  attend  to  without  bothering  with  the 
afi'airs  of  others,  and  I  defy  any  one  to  show  the  slightest  evidence  that  we 
have  interfered  with  this  irrigation  business  in  any  way,  except  to  ask  all  of 
our  friends  to  vote  for  the  irrigators,  and  all  statements  to  the  contrary  are 
false.  But  that  is  all  we  have  done.  We  have  not  sought  in  this  or  any 
other  matter  to  influence  legislation.  We  are  not  in  politics  even  for  our  own 
protection.  We  recognize  that  the  people  of  the  State  are  disposed  to  treat 
us  fairly.  We  believe  that  the  friction  caused  by  misstatements  has  been 
smoothed  away,  and  we  are  perfectly  willing  to  trust  ourselves  in  the  hands 


178 


of  the  people,  whose  interests  are  identical  with  ours.  We  have  no  one  to 
set  up  and  no  one  to  pull  down.  What  we  need  we  will  ask  for  plainly  and^ 
freely,  and  will  trust  alone  to  the  merits  of  our  request." 


The  Livermore  Valley  Review. 

The  address  to  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  California,  by  the  Legisla- 
tive Irrigation  Committee,  is  before  us.  It  is  a  full  report  upon  the  question 
of  irrigation,  and  the  subject  is  discussed  fully  under  the  following  heads : 
"Irrigation  a  Natural  Want;  Benefits  of  Irrigation;  Injurious  Consequences 
of  Denial  of  Right  of  Irrigation;  Customs  and  Usages,  Irrespective  of  Law; 
The  Law  on  the  Subject."  Next  is  the  noted  case  of  CoflSn  et  al.,  vs.  The 
Left-Haud  Ditch  Company.  Then  follows  the  opinions  of  the  press  on  the 
subject  of  irrigation.  They  are  all  of  the  opinion  that  a  well  regulated 
system  of  irrigation  must  be  established  before  the  agricultural  re- 
sources of  the  State  can  be  fairly  developed."  The  following  on  the 
irrigation  contest  from  the  Record-  Union,  is  to  the  point,  and  expresses  our 
sentiments : 

* '  The  people  are  agreeing  upon  the  need  for  an  irrigation  system,  and  are 
aU  of  one  mind  concerning  the  use  for  irrigation,  of  all  waters  that  can  be 
diverted  to  that  purpose,  consistently  with  the  best  interests  of  the  State  and 
all  its  citizens.  When  we  come  to  methods,  it  is  discovered  to  be  the  most 
difficult  problem  for  solution  that  has  yet  presented.  But  we  have  faith  that 
it  will  be  solved.  The  future  of  the  valleys  needing  irrigation,  under  a  wise 
system  of  use  of  the  waters,  will  be  one  of  the  greatest  possibilities,  wealth 
and  prosperity.  Where  we  now  have  hundreds  of  homes,  we  shall  have 
thousands;  where  we  now  have  one  consumer,  we  shall  have  fifty  or  a  hun- 
dred. Every  interest,  commercial  or  industrial,  will  be  advanced,  and  all  the 
people  will  be  benefited.  But  not  even  can  this  glowing  future  be  realized 
at  the  expense  of  the  destruction  of  the  navigable  streams.  They  are  neces- 
sary for  commercial  uses  and  sanitation;  they  secure  to  the  interior  commer- 
cial advantages  not  otherwise  obtainable;  they  cheapen  transportation;  they 
build  up  trade;  they  are  free  highways,  the  heritage  of  all  the  people." 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

No  More  Extra  Sessions. 

The  baffled  irrigators  talk  of  having  an  extra  session  called  for  the  purpose 
of  trying  to  pass  their  bills.  It  would  be  a  mistake.  Nothing  can  be  done 
with  the  present  Legislature.  It  would  be  as  difficult  to  pass  the  irrigation, 
measures  sixty  days  from  now  as  it  is  at  present.  The  men  will  not  change. 
It  is  no  secret  why  the  bills  will  not  pass,  and  if  an  extra  session  were  called 
the  obstructionists  would  simply  raise  their  terms.  The  only  chance  for  th& 
irrigators,  if  the  bills  fail,  is  to  be  sure  to  elect  men  to  the  next  Legislature 


179 


npon  whom  they  can  rely.  No  tainted  man,  no  man  who  is  affiliated  with 
the  monopoly,  no  man  whose  character  does  not  raise  him  above  the  suspic- 
ion of  bribery,  should  be  nominated,  and  if  either  party  'nominates  such  a 
man  his  party  associates  should  bolt  the  ticket  and  knife  him. 

It  is  very  seldom  that  any  good  is  done  at  an  extra  session.  It  is  expensive 
and  every  one  is  impatient  to  go  home.  It  is  like  a  lesson  set  to  a  schoolboy 
on  a  holiday — his  soul  revolts  against  it.  Strikers  revel  on  such  occasions. 
They  know,  too,  that  when  an  extra  session  is  called  somebody  wants  some- 
thing very  bad  and  they  raise  their  price  accordingly.  Somebody  congratu- 
lated a  railroad  man  last  June  on  the  success  of  the  monopoly  in  defeating 
legislation  at  the  extra  session  last  year.  "Ah!"  said  the  other,  "you  do  not 
know  what  it  cost.     The  scoundrels  knew  we  were  at  their  mercy." 

Everybody  will  be  sorry  if  the  bills  for  irrigation  fail  to  become  laws  and 
the  business  of  supplying  water  to  Southern  California  under  a  comprehen- 
sive system  has  to  be  deferred  for  two  years  more.  But  it  would  not  mend 
matters  to  summon  an  extra  session  and  it  might  be  the  occasion  of  the  pas- 
sage of  some  very  bad  bills,  for  the*"  call  would  probably  be  broadened  so  as 
to  embrace  other  subjects  deemed  important. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Why  This  Delayl 

The  committee  from  the  Fresno  convention  has  laid  before  the  State  Sen- 
ate a  last  appeal  to  take  up  the  irrigation  bills.  It  may  or  may  not  be  suc- 
cessful. From  present  appearances  we  should  say  it  would  not.  There  ap- 
pears to  be  a  set  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  railway  brigade  to  defeat  all  leg- 
islation for  supplying  water  to  Southern  California.  Why  the  monopoly 
should  pursue  this  course  is  inexplicable.  It  is  to  the  interest  of  the 
Southern  Pacific  that  the  resources  of  the  country  through  which  it  runs 
should  be  developed.  If  any  one  will  benefit  by  irrigation  laws  it  will 
be  the  railroads,  which  is  the  largest  landholder  in  the  dry  section  of  the 
State.  Yet  it  is  a  fact  which  has  escaped  the  attention  of  no  careful  reader  of 
the  Legislative  proceedings  that  from  the  opening  of  the  session  to  the  pres- 
ent time  the  men  who  serve  the  monopoly  have  steadily  obstructed  the  pass- 
age of  these  laws.  They  would  have  been  much  nearer  their  passage  but  for 
the  absurd  and  ridiculous  bill  which  Whitney — whom  the  monopoly  often  se- 
lects to  do  its  work — introduced  for  the  purpose  of  blocking  their  path.  The 
anomaly  can  only  be  explained  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  irrigation  bills 
were  advocated  by  men  who  have  been  prominent  as  anti-monopolists,  and 
that  on  this  ground  the  railway  tools  determined  to  murder  them. 

Members  of  the  Legislature  may  as  well  understand  at  once  that  for  them  it 
is  a  matter  of  political  life  or  death.  No  member  of  the  Legislature  from 
Southern  California  who  failed  to  give  all  possible  aid  and  assistance  to  the 
passage  of  these  bills  can  ever  hope  again  to  be  nominated  for  office,  and  it  will 
not  be  in  Southern  California  alone  that  popular  resentment  will  be  shown. 


180 


San  Fraucisco  and  every  other  town  in  the  State  is  vitally  concerned  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  southern  counties.  California's  future  largely  depends  on  it. 
Last  year  has  taught  us  that  we  cannot  rely  on  wheat  alone  for  prosperity. 
To  hold  our  own  in  the  race  for  success,  we  must  increase  our  acreage  of 
fruit  and  vines,  and  this  cannot  be  done  in  the  sections  best  suited  to  that 
branch  of  agriculture  without  irrigation.  The  men  who,  in  obedience  to  the 
demand  of  the  railway,  render  irrigation  impossible  are  striking  a  blow  at  the 
progress  of  the  whole  State,  and  they  will  be  punished  accordingly. 

Admonition,  however,  will  propably  fall  on  deaf  ears.  When  the  Legisla- 
ture passed  Heath's  Amendment  and  Parks'  Drainage  Claim  bill,  members 
must  have  felt  that  they  were  bidding  farewell  to  political  life.  There  prob- 
ably never  was  before,  in  any  State  of  the  Union  a  Legislature  which  exempt- 
ed railroads  from  taxation,  or  oae  which  postponed  measures  of  general  utility 
for  the  purpose  of  passing  an  Act  to  divide  a  quarter  of  a  million  among  a 
parcel  of  speculators  and  their  conspirators.  Bad  as  many  of  the  past  Legis- 
latures have  been  in  this  State,  there  never  was  one  as  bad  as  this.  It  there- 
fore seems  almost  hopeless  to  expect  at  this  late  hour  the  prayer  of  the 
southern  farmer  will  be  heard. 


Visalia  Delta. 

The  liegfislatnre  and  Irrigfation. 

The  Assembly  has  done  excellent  work  on  irrigation  legislation,  but  the 
Senate  has  accomplished  nothing  as  yet.  The  members  of  the  lower  house 
from  all  the  irrigating  counties,  and  from  many  others  in  Northern  Cali- 
fornia, have  worked  earnestly  to  have  this  matter  settled.  On  Tuesday  the 
bill  providing  for  the  discovery  and  adjudication  of  all  diversions  of  State 
water  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  55  to  10;  and  the  bill  for  the  formation  of 
water  and  irrigation  districts  was  passed  by  a  vote  of  52  to  11.  The 
Assembly  constitutional  amendment  fixing  the  minimum  charge  at  which 
County  Supervisors  can  rate  irrigation  water  supplied  by  works  owned  by 
others  than  irrigation  districts  at  7  per  cent,  on  the  investment,  was  also 
passed,  by  a  vote  of  56  to  13.  The  last-named  completes  the  list  of  bills  and 
amendments  proposed  by  the  State  Irrigation  Convention  held  at  Fresno, 
so  far  as  the  Assembly  is  concerned.  All  but  one  of  these  have  been  sent  to 
the  Senate  for  action,  but  there  every  effort  is  being  made  to  obstruct  legis- 
lation on  this  matter  by  several  Senators,  although  a  number  of  influential 
members  of  that  body  are  in  sympathy  with  the  majority  in  the  Assembly, 
and  are  anxious  to  have  the  Senate  take  speedy  and  favorable  action  in  the 
matter. 

The  metropolitan  press  still  fcontinnes  to  give  considerable  space  to  the 
discussion  of  the  irrigation  question,  and  treats  it  more  practically  and  intel- 
ligently than  it  did  a  few  weeks  ago.  The  whole  State,  including  the  sec- 
tions where  irrigation  is  a  necessity,  have  learned  much  regarding  this 
matter  during  the  past  three  months.  Several  associations  of  business  men 
have  raised  their  voice  in  asking  the  Legislature  to  act  in  the  matter  during 


i 


181 


the  present  session,  and  the  presentation  of  the  resolutions  passed  by  them 
has  not  been  without  its  effect.  Directors  of  the  Immigration  Association, 
whose  work  lies  in  every  part  of  the  State,  at  a  recent  meeting  adopted 
resolutions  to  the  effect  that  although  a  uniform  irrigation  law  seems 
impracticable,  owing  to  the  widely  varying  climate  and  topographical  condi- 
tions of  the  State,  yet,  as  an  equitable  distribution  of  water  for  irrigation 
purposes  is  essential  to  the  agricultural  development  of  some  parts  of  the 
State,  and  the  purpose  of  the  Association  may  be  injured  by  placing  unwise 
restrictions  upon  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation  purposes,  particularly  in 
the  San  Joaquin  Valley  in  Southern  California,  it  was  resolved  that  the  San 
Francisco  members  of  the  Legislature  be  requested  to  use  their  best  efforts 
to  secure  an  economical  and  beneficial  application  of  the  available  water 
supply,  and  to  provide  against  excessive  charges  for  the  same. 

Those  members  of  the  Legislature  who  are  straining  every  nerve  to  kill  the 
irrigation  bills,  are  doing  their  best  to  cripple  the  prosperity  of  the  State. 
There  is  a  large  area  of  the  State  that  can  be  made  productive  by  irrigation, 
and  must  remain  almost  worthless  without  it.  The  artificial  use  of  water  in 
such  places  will  in  no  way  affect  water  rights  in  non-irrigating  parts  of  the 
State.  And  no  injustice  will  be  perpetrated  on  riparian  owners  or  others  by 
the  working  of  the  proposed  laws,  as  will  be  seen  by  a  careful  reading  of 
them. 


Fresno  Republican. 

Dangerous  Ground. 

The  Senate  amendment  to  the  bill  repealing  the  statutory  law  recognizing 
the  old  common  law  of  riparian  rights,  is  the  most  dangerous  move  yet  made 
against  irrigation.  It  is  more  dangerous  because  it  has  upon  the  face  of  it 
the  appearance  of  fairness.  The  amendment  provides  that  at  all  times 
riparian  proprietors  are  entitled  to  a  sufficient  flow  of  water  by  their 
premises  for  the  use  of  their  stock,  etc.  To  those  unacquainted  with  the 
natural  conditions  of  the  streams  of  Southern  California,  this  proposition 
has  the  appearance  of  equity  and  justice.  A  large  majority  of  the  members 
of  the  Legislature  are  unacquainted  with  natural  and  other  conditions  of 
the  irrigated  portions  of  the  State,  hence  the  danger  of  their  being  misled. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  riparian  claimants  have  no  interests  adverse  to 
irrigators  except  in  that  they  wish  to  be  declared  the  owners  of  the  waters 
of  natural  streams  that  they  may  exact  tribute  from  those  who  would  divert 
the  water  from  its  natural  channel. 

The  few  settlers  along  the  high  banks  of  the  upper  portions  of  the  streams 
are  not  factors  in  this  fight.  They  are  almost  universally  in  favor  of  irriga- 
tion, and  admit  that  the  general  benefits  which  accrue  from  it  more  than 
compensate  them  for  any  real  or  imaginary  loss  in  the  diversion  of  water. 
The  riparian  claimants  proper  are  the  owners  of  large  tracts  of  alleged  swamp 
or  overflowed  lands  at  the  lower  end  of  the  streams.  During  flood  times  in 
wet  years,  the  water  flowing  through  these  channels  fill  small  lakes  and 


182 


swamps  on  which  their  lands  are  located.  During  these  seasons  they  are 
only  too  anxious  to  have  as  much  water  as  possible  diverted.  It  is  at  such 
time  that  the  irrigators  have  but  little  use  for  the  water  to  apply  to  their 
rain-soaked  lands.  It  is  during  the  dry  seasons  that  water  must  be  had  for 
irrigation,  and  it  is  during  those  seasons  that  the  riparian  owner  can  get  no 
water,  irrigation  or  no  irrigation.  There  is  no  season  so  dry  but  that  a  con- 
siderable volume  of  water  flows  from  the  mountain  reservoirs  of  snow  and 
ice  at  the  heads  of  these  streams.  In  dashing  down  its  steep  and  stony 
channels  from  the  mountain  tops,  but  little  or  no  water  is  lost  by  evapora- 
tion or  seepage.  It  would  flow  on  through  the  deep  channel  in  the  higher 
plain  without  much  loss,  but  when  it  reaches  the  great  level  plain  it  widens 
and  spreads  out  into  vast  beds  of  quicksand  into  which  the  ordinary  flow  of 
water  sinks  and  is  as  completely  lost  as  though  it  had  dashed  over  a  precipice 
into  the  very  depths  of  the  earth.  It  never  reaches  the  riparian  land  monop- 
olist further  down  the  stream,  and  is  of  no  more  use  to  him  than  if  it  had 
remained  an  ice  glacier  at  the  summit  of  the  Sierras.  He  may  want  the 
water  for  the  use  of  his  stock  at  such  times,  but  nature  has  so  ordained  that 
he  cannot  have  it. 

It  is  then  that  the  irrigators  find  a  most  beneficial  use  for  this  otherwise 
useless  water.  With  their  canals  they  tap  the  flowing  streams  at  the  points 
■where  they  issue  from  the  mountains  and  the  water  is  carried  to  the  plains 
and  makes  fruitful  thousands  of  acres  of  land  that  without  it  would  be  a 
desert  waste.  These  are  facts  which  the  riparianist  cannot  controvert,  and 
while  they  apply  particularly  to  Kings  and  Kern  rivers,  they  apply  to  many 
similiar  streams  in  southern  California. 

Where,  then,  is  the  justice  of  this  amendment?  It  gives  the  riparianists 
nothing,  and  yet  takes  the  water  from  the  irrigators  at  a  time  when  they 
most  need  it.  The  Sacramento  Capital  shows  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  in  the 
following  comment  on  the  proposed  amendment: 

"  What  is  the  effect,  then,  of  this  amendment?  Is  it  not  to  give  these 
alleged  riparainists  all  they  could  get  under  the  broadest  construction  of  the 
common  law?  To  give  them  water  for  stock  and  domestic  puposes,  when 
the  streams  are  not  in  flood,  and  water  is  most  needed  for  irrigation,  would 
be  to  compel  every  drop  to  remain  in  the  channels  to  sink  in  the  sand  long 
before  it  reached  their  lands,  giving  them  power  to  levy  tribute  on  the  agri- 
cultural interests  above  them  in  millions  of  dollars  annually.  Besides  all 
these  riparianists — cattle  owners — have  long  since  found  that  the  stagnant 
alkaline  water  festering  in  ponds,  sloughs  and  tule  swamps,  under  the  burn- 
ing sun  of  the  dry  season,  is  injurious  to  their  stock,  and  have  substituted 
with  infinite  pecuniary  advantage  the  cold,  pure  water  of  artesian  and  other 
wells,  which  is  found  in  abundance  near  the  surface.  The  irrigation  bills 
provide  for  the  payment  to  them  of  all  damage  that  may  result  from  the 
diversion  of  water  above  them  which  must  in  time  again  reach  them  more 
permanently  by  percolation,  as  we  have  elsewhere  shown;  but  with  this, 
which'would  satisfy  all  men  in  every  other  walk  of  life  actuated  by  the  ordinary 
considerations  of  interest  and  business,  they  are  not  satisfied." 


183 

LThey  are  not  satisfied  because  they  want  to  be  declared  the  absolute 
owners  of  all  water  in  the  flowing  streams  of  the  State.  It  would  make 
them  virtual  owners  of  a  vast  empire  in  southern  California,  and  that  is 
something  worthy  of  the  ambition  of  men  who  have  already  a  taste  of  mon- 
opoly. With  such  a  prize  in  view  they  can  afi'ord  to  corrupt  a  few  Legisla- 
tures, subsidize  newspapers  and  hire  attorneys.  If  there  were  nothing  more 
at  stake  than  the  water  they  want  for  their  stock,  they  would  not  lift  a  hand 
to  perpetuate  the  riparian  infamy.  J 

McClure's  bill  creating  a  commission  to  investigate  the  irrigation  ques- 
tion, aside  from  the  fact  that  it  defeats  the  passage  of  laws  necessary  to  the 
public  welfare,  is  a  humbug.  It  creates,  at  a  large  expense,  a  body  to  do 
work  which  can  be  better  done  by  the  State  Engineer.  Indeed,  that  most 
competent  official  has,  during  the  past  two  years,  given  the  question  all  the 

nvestigation  necessary  for  intelligent  legislative  action.  The  McClure  bill 
is  simply  a  part  of  the  programme  of  the  riparian  land  monopolists,  and  has 
no  other  object  than  the  defeat  of  irrigation  laws. 


San  Bernardino  Times. 

It  begins  to  look  as  though  the  Legislature  would  adjourn  without  definite 
action  upon  the  only  matter  of  importance  that  has  as  yet  come  before  it — 
the  irrigation  bill.  As  the  common  law  now  stands,  the  farmers  and  horti- 
culturists of  Southern  California  are  wholly  at  the  mercy  of  parties  below 
them  on  the  stream,  who  may  insist  upon  the  undiminished  flow  of  all  water 
in  its  natural  channel.  The  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  on  the  riparian 
question,  if  followed  out  to  its  legitimate  conclusion,  relegates  Southern 
California  to  its  original  desert  condition.  Irrigation  alone  has  made  South- 
ern California  what  it  is — the  garden  of  the  Union.  It  has  made  thousands 
upon  thousands  of  happy  homes,  where  before  was  only  a  desert  waste;  it  is 
increasing  our  population  and  wealth  each  year;  it  is  all  tons,  and  to  this 
vital  matter  the  Supreme  Court  has  dealt  a  death  blow.  It  is  not  probable 
that  the  Supreme  Court  will  reverse  its  own  rulings,  and  our  only  hope  was 
in  legislative  action,  and  this  hope  looks  now  as  if  destined  to  frustration. 
What  the  result  may  be  it  is  hard  to  tell.  There  are  cranky  individuals  who 
may  cause  trouble  by  taking  advantage  of  the  Court's  decision,  and,  though 
it  may  not  benefit  them,  may  injure  their  neighbors.  And  here  is  a  fruitful 
source  of  trouble.  Men  who  have  spent  years  of  their  lives  and  thousands 
of  dollars  of  money  to  build  up  homes,  are  not  going  to  submit  to  so  unjust  a 
ruling,  and  see  them  laid  waste  without  a  struggle.  The  man  who  will  not 
fight  for  his  home  does  not  deserve  one,  and  brave  men  who  have  toiled  for 
years  to  build  one  up  will  fight  to  maintain  it.  Take  away  their  water  in- 
terests and  you  take  their  homes,  and  this  will  not  be  submitted  to.  The 
general  interest  in  Southern  California  is  with  the  irrigators,  for  the  reason 
that  we  have  no  use  for  running  water  for  other  purposes.  We  have  no 
navigable  streams,  none  that  are  worth  much  for  manufacturers  after  they 


184 


leave  the  mountains,  and  hence  public  opinion  will  do  much  to  define  water 
rights,  despite  court  rulings.  But  a  door  has  been  left  open  for  trouble  that 
should  not  have  been;  and  the  people  put  on  the  defensive,  when  the  law 
should  protect  them  in  their  rights  to  homes  in  peace.  The  Legislature 
should  take  action  in  the  matter,  and  right  the  wrong  that  the  courts — per- 
haps justly  from  a  legal  standpoint — have  inflicted  upon  us.  Common  law  is 
applicable  in  all  sections  where  there  is  no  statutory  law.  And  it  is  here  that 
the  trouble  comes.  A  ruling  that  would  be  eminently  just  and  proper  in  one 
section,  is  grossly  unjust  in  another,  where  conditions  are  opposite.  In  the 
east,  and  England,  from  whence  we  derive  our  common  law,  irrigation  is  not 
dreamed  of.  The  streams  have  no  use  except  for  navigation  or  manufactur- 
ing purposes,  and  who  diverts  the  water  of  them  and  decreases  their  flow  in- 
jures his  neighbors  below  him.  The  contrary  is  true  in  Southern  California. 
Our  streams  are  valuable  only  for  irrigation.  We  must  divert  the  water  and 
consume  it  entirely.  Hence  a  ruling  that  would  suit  in  the  east  is  wrong  in 
the  west.  Yet  it  is  made  applicable  to  us  because  precedent  has  established 
it.  The  legislature  has  got  to  right  this,  or  there  will  be  trouble  grow  out  of 
it  in  Southern  California. 


Modesto  News. 

Irrififation. 

Assembly  bills  number  170  and  171  have  been  passed  by  that  body,  and 
now  only  need  the  concurrence  of  the  Senate  to  become  part  of  our  statutory 
law.  Bill  No.  170  provides  that  water  in  our  rivers  may  be  diverted  and 
appropriated  to  the  uses  and  purposes  of  irrigation.  The  rights  of  riparian 
owners  are  thoroughly  adjudicated  and  determined  by  this  bill.  Bill  No. 
171  repeals  the  common  law  in  as  far  as  it  guarantees  riparian  owners 
exclusive  water  rights.  These  bills  will  now  probably  be  brought  up  in  the 
Senate  at  once,  and  immediate  action  demanded,  If  the  Senate  should 
see  proper  to  pass  the  bills,  then  the  matter,  so  far  as  legislation  is  con- 
cerned, would  be  settled.  It  would  then  but  remain  to  be  practically  tested 
by  those  in  whose  behalf  it  has  been  desired.  The  Legislative  Committee 
on  Irrigation,  and  those  who  have  interested  themselves  in  behalf  of  this 
legislation,  do  not  claim  that  these  bills  are  absolutely  perfect,  but  so  far  as 
we  have  learned,  they  deal  with  the  question  in  an  intelligent  and  fair 
manner,  and  will,  without  doubt,  prove  of  great  benefit  to  the  people  of  this 
State,  if  incorporated  into  our  statutes.  The  question  of  irigation  is  one  of 
Tast  importance  to  the  people  living  in  certain  portions  of  this  State,  and  the 
needs  of  these  people  imperatively  demand  legislative  action  at  this  time» 
The  Legislature,  so  far,  has  done  comparatively  little  good.  But  few 
measures  have  been  passed  by  it,  and  none  of  any  great  importance.  There 
has  been  a  useless  consumption  of  time  and  an  enormous  waste  of  public 
money,  and  the  people  have  derived  no  substantial  benefit.  Before  a  final 
adjournment,  the  passage  of  the  needed  irrigation  laws  would  at  least  par- 


185 


tially  absolve  the  Legislature  from  the  sins  of  past  bad  conduct.  In  this  the 
Assembly  has  taken  the  initiative,  and  all  commend  it  for  its  action  on  these 
bills.  The  Senate  is  yet  to  hear  from,  however.  And  it  is  not  at  all  certain 
that  that  body  will  take  the  same  view  that  has  been  expressed  by  the 
Assembly.  The  Senate  is  equally  divided,  politically,  and  the  question  of 
irrigation  has  not  yet  become,  and  should  not  be  made,  a  partisan  issue. 
Neither  party  is  likely  to  take  any  stand  against  it.  It  is  to  be  earnestly 
hoped  that  the  desired  legislation  will  be  given  to  the  people  during  the 
present  session. 

San  Francisco  Examiner. 

The  Gondemnation  of    Water, 

Objection  has  been  made  to  the  clauses  in  Senate  Bill  410,  declaring  the 
use  of  water  for  irrigating  puposes  a  public  use  and  providing  for  its  con- 
demnation for  such  purposes  under  the  provisions  of  the  Code  relating  to 
eminent  domain,  upon  the  ground  that  these  clauses  are  contrary  to  those 
sections  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  which  pro- 
vide that  private  property  shall  not  be  taken  for  public  use  without  just  com- 
pensation. In  so  far  as  concerns  the  Federal  Constitution,  this  objection  is 
disposed  of  by  the  case  of  Withers  vs.  Buckley,  reported  in  20  Howard, 
United  States,  page  84,  in  which  it  is  held  that  the  provision  mentioned  was 
intended  to  prevent  the  Government  of  the  United  States  from  taking  prop- 
erty for  public  uses  without  just  compensation,  and  was  not  intended  as  a  re- 
straint upon  State  Governments. 

The  State  Constitution  provides  that  the  use  of  all  water  now  appropriated, 
or  that  may  hereafter  be  appropriated,  for  sale,  rental  or  distribution,  is 
hereby  declared  to  be  a  public  use,  and  subject  to  the  regulation  and  control 
of  the  State  in  the  manner  to  be  prescribed  by  law.  This  is  an  unlimited 
declaration  that  the  use  of  water  for  sale,  rental  or  distribution  is  public,  and 
includes  sale,  rental  or  distribution  for  all  purposes,  and  among  them  sale, 
rental  or  distribution  for  irrigation  purposes.  How  can  the  Courts  declare 
unconstitutional  a  law  which  is  expressly  and  on  terms  authorized  by  the 
Constitution?  No  Judge  on  the  bench  will  ever  attempt  to  construe  away  a 
clause  in  the  Constitution  so  direct  and  free  from  ambiguity  as  this.  It  can- 
not be  limited  by  the  Courts  to  what  may  hitherto  have  been  deemed  a  public 
use.  That  would  be  to  substitute  a  different  proposition,  so  as  to  make  the 
Constitution  read,  "the  public  use  of  water,  etc.,  is  a  public  use,"  instead  of, 
as  it  now  reads,  "the  use  of  water,  etc.,  is  a  public  use."  This  is  too  absurd 
to  give  it  a  thought.  Besides,  this  is  only  another  way  of  stating  that  the  use 
of  water  for  rental,  sale  and  distribution  for  all  purposes  is  a  public  necessity 
and  will  contribute  to  the  general  welfare  of  the  community. 

Even  independent  of  this  provision  of  the  Constitution,  there  is  good 
authority  for  asserting  that  the  Legislature  would  be  sustained  by  the  Courts 
in  declaring  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation  purposes  a  public  use.  In  01m- 
stead  vs.  Camp  (33  Connecticut,  548)  is  found  this  language: 


186 


*'  In  a  broad,  comprehensive  view,  such  as  has  heretofore  been  taken  of  the 
construction  of  this  clause  of  the  declaration  of  rights,  everything  which  tends 
to  enlarge  the  resources,  increase  the  industrial  energies,  and  promote  the 
productive  power  of  any  considerable  number  of  the  inhabitants  of  a  section 
of  the  State,  or  which  leads  to  the  creation  of  towns  and  the  creation  of  new 
resources  for  the  employment  of  capital  and  labor,  evidently  contributes  to 
the  general  welfare  and  the  prosperity  of  the  whole  community,  and  is  there- 
fore a  public  use." 

In  the  same  case  it  is  again  said : 

"The  question  is  asked,  with  great  pertinence  and  propriety,  What,  then, 
is  the  limit  of  the  legislative  power  under  the  clause  which  we  have  been 
considering,  and  what  is  the  exact  line  between  public  and  private  uses? 
Our  reply  is  that  which  has  heretofore  been  quoted.  From  the  nature  of  the 
case  there  can  be  no  precise  line.  The  power  requires  a  degree  of  elasticity  to 
be  capable  of  meeting  new  conditions  and  improvements^  and  the  ever-increasing 
necessities  of  society.  The  sole  dependence  must  be  on  the  presumed  wisdom 
of  the  sovereign  authority  supervised,  and  in  cases  of  gross  error  or  extreme 
wrong,  controlled  by  the  dispassionate  judgment  of  the  Courts. 

The  Constitution  has  thus  given  the  Legislature  a  power  to  apply  the  law 
of  condemnation  to  the  use  of  water,  even  it  had  no  prior  existence,  and  has 
deprived  the  Courts  of  the  jurisdiction  to  say  whether  or  not  the  use  of  water 
is  a  public  use.  It  has  been  made  possible  to  make  the  law  of  water  rights 
meet  "  new  conditions  and  improvements,  and  the  ever-increasing  necessi- 
ties of , society,"  and  to  enable  "this  State  to  keep  pace  with  others  in  the 
progress  of  improvements,  and  to  render  to  its  citizens  the  fullest  opportunity 
for  success  in  industrial  competition."  The  law  of  riparian  rights,  if  it  be 
more  than  a  phantom  here,  must  be  made  to  yield  to  the  superior  necessities 
of  the  people.  Those  who  have  rights  will  be  justly  compensated,  but  the 
ancient  doctrine  which  sustains  them  shall  no  longer  give  protection,  further 
than  to  secure  an  equivalent  in  damages.  The  riparian  owners  who  resist 
this  equitable  adjustment  between  their  alleged  ,rights  and  the  public  needs, 
may- soon  find  confronting  them  a  constitutional  amendment  which  abolishes 
their  claims  without  entitling  them  to  compensation. 


*  Alta  California. 

The  Whitney  Water  BUI. 

The  Senate  had  under  consideration  yesterday  a  bill  which,  under  the  guise 
of  friendship  to  the  cause  of  irrigation,  will,  if  passed,  deprive  the  State  of 
what  little  right  the  Supreme  Court  has  left  it  to  the  use  of  running  water  for 
irrigation.  The  bill  might  properly  be  entitled  "An  Act  to  confirm  the  com- 
mon law  of  riparian  rights,  to  confer  additional  rights  upon  swamp  land 
owners  and  cattle  raisers,  and  to  abolish  irrigation."  There  is  not  a  syllable 
in  the  bill  which  merits  the  approval  of  any  bona  fide  advocate  of  the  ap- 
plication of  water  for  irrigation  purposes.     Among  the   worst  of  all  the 


187 


unwise  provisions  contained  in  the  bill  are  sections  6,  7  and  8.     TheyreaiJ 
as  follows: 

Sec.  6.  The  waters  hereby  declared  to  be  the  common  property  of  the  State 
are  devoted  to  the  sustaining  of  life,  to  domestic  and  sanitary  uses,  and  to 
the  watering  of  stock,  which  shall  always  be  preferred  uses. 

Sec.  7.  In  the  arid  and  agricultural  portions  of  the  State,  subject  to  the 
4)referred  uses  declared  in  the  preceding  section,  all  lands  susceptible  of  irri- 
gation from  the  waters  therein  mentioned  are  entitled  to  such  waters  for  irri- 
gation to  the  full  requirement  of  the  soil  for  agricultural  purposes.  Those 
parts  of  the  State  are  declared  to  be  arid,  within  the  intent  of  this  section, 
in  which  the  increase  of  the  agricultural  products  of  the  soil  will  compensate 
for  the  «ost  of  construction  and  maintenance  of  the  necessary  means  of  arti- 
ficial irrigation. 

Sec.  8.  The  owner  of  lands  watered  by  the  natural  overflow  of  a  stream 
has  a  right,  by  ditches  constructed  so  as  to  prevent  waste  in  the  channels 
above,  to  sufficient  water  for  the  reasonable  irrigation  of  such  lands  during 
the  times  of  such  natural  overflow. 

Every  word  of  these  sections  is  destructive  of  the  policy  of  devoting  the 
water  of  our  streams  to  irrigation.  The  substance  of  Section  six  had  pre- 
viously been  the  subject  of  discussion  in  the  Senate,  and  in  the  form  of  an 
amendment  to  Assembly  Bill  410,  was  defeated  upon  the  sole  ground  that  its 
practical  effect  would  be  to  nullify  any  attempt  to  legalize  irrigation.  It  was 
clearly  demonstrated  in  debate  that,  from  the  nature  and  peculiarities  of  the 
streams  in  Southern  California,  if  the  amendment  were  adopted  irrigation 
would  have  to  be  suspended  for  the  benefit  of  the  cattle-raisers.  It  was  also 
made  plain  to  the  Senate  that  water  for  sustaining  life,  for  domestic  and 
sanitary  purposes  and  for  the  watering  of  stock,  can  be  easily  and  cheaply 
obtained*  by  other  means.  Section  seven  merely  reaffirms  the  preference 
against  irrigation  given  by  Section  six.  Section  eight  was  evidently  con- 
strued by  one  who  has  made  a  study  of  how  to  so  legislate  as  to  inflict  a 
deadly  injury  to  irrigation  under  pretense  of  doing  good.  The  "lands  watered 
by  the  natural  overflow  of  a  stream,"  means  swamp  lands,  whether  they  be 
riparian  lands  or  otherwise.  The  swamp  lands  overflowed  by  the  streams  of 
Southern  California  are  so  situated  that,  no  matter  whether  the  water  is  high 
or  low,  whether  in  time  of  freshet  or  in  the  dry  season  when  water  is  scarce 
if  any  water  reaches  the  margin  of  the  swamps  into  which  the  river  empties, 
all  of  it  spreads  out  over  and  overflows  them.  The  consequence  would  be 
that  under  such  a  provision  of  the  law  the  swamp  land  owner  would  become 
entitled  to  all  the  water  of  the  river  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  all  others,  and  this  without  regard  to  whether  or  not  such  swamp  land 
owner  is  a  riparian  proprietor  or  not.  Whatever  may  be  the  design  of  the 
Whitney  bill,  its  passage  will  give  us  a  water  law  even  more  odious  than  the 
common  law  of  riparian  rights.  It  will  receive  the  unanimous  support  of 
riparianists.  Senator  Whitney,  who  introduced  the  bill,  evidently  has  mis- 
apprehended the  practical  effect  which  this  bill  would  have  upon  irrigation  if 
made  the  law  governing  the  rivers  of  the  San  Joaquin  basin. 


188 
Daily  Alta  California. 

The  Brink  of  tlie  Rubicon. 

An  eloquent  appeal  to  the  Senate  in  behalf  of  action  upon  the  irrigation 
bills  before  adjournment,  signed  by  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  State 
Irrigation  Convention,  has  been  prepared  and  presented.  Will  the  Senate 
respond?  Are  the  filibustering  tactics  by  which  irrigation  legislation  ha^ 
thus  far  been  successfully  subordinated  to  every  small  scheme  and  every 
petty  measure  of  private  interest  to  be  allowed  to  stifle  the  willing  action  of  a 
majority  of  the  Senate,  and  to  throttle  the  wishes  of  the  people  of  the  State? 
The  time  is  short.  The  irrigation  bills  must  either  be  taken  up  and  passed 
immediately,  or  the  session  must  be  prolonged  until  they  can  be  reached  and 
acted  upon.  To  adjourn  without  action,  is  to  merit  and  receive  the  execra- 
tions of  the  great  mass  of  the  people.  If  the  Legislature  adjourns  before 
taking  up  the  bills  the  people  will  have  to  take  up  the  fight  in  earnest.  The 
causes  of  defeat  will  be  analyzed.  The  proceedings  of  the  Legislature  will 
be  closely  scrutinized  to  get  at  the  root  of  the  reason  why  these  bills  have 
failed  of  passage,  with  a  majority  in  their  favor.  Every  vote  and  every  word 
of  each  individual  member  will  be  subject  to  the  severest  criticism.  Every 
means  of  publicity  will  be  made  use  of  to  inform  the  people  of  the  attitude 
of  each  individual  member  of  the  Legislature  toward  the  irrigation  bills.  No 
member  shall  escape  being  weighed  in  the  balance.  Those  whom  the  people 
find  wanting  may  expect  just  retaliation.  The  motto  of  the  irrigators  in  com- 
ing elections  will  be:  •'  Let  no  guilty  man  escape." 

In  brief,  the  position  of  the  irrigation  bills  is  this:  There  are  a  majority 
of  Senators  in  favor  of  their  passage,  but  it  requires  a  two-thirds  majority  to 
reach  and  pass  them  before  the  expiration  of  the  sixty  days  of  the  session, 
and  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  majority  can  be  obtained.  If  the  Legislature 
will  remain  in  session  a  few  days  after  the  per  diem  has  stopped,  the  irriga- 
tion bills  and  all  other  important  bills  can  be  passed.  By  making  a  little 
personal  sacrifice  the  members  of  the  Legislature  can  do  the  State  an  in- 
estimable service.  Is  it  possible  that  they  will  adjourn  and  leave  the  most 
important  part  of  their  work  undone? 


Colusa  Sun. 

The  Slickens  Fi^ ht— A  Retrospect. 

When  the  people  of  the  valley  first  began  to  protest  against  the  destruction 
of  their  farms  by  the  hydraulic  mining  process,  their  voice  was  so  feeble  as 
not  to  be  heard  by  the  nearest  neighbor  of  the  men  beiug  injured.  Even 
those  whose  turn  was  to  come  next,  would  not  lend  an  assistant  hand. 
Mining  was  the  great  interest — farming  the  smaller.  The  Courts  were  ap- 
pealed to,  but  men  lived  and  died  while  the  cases  hung  fire.  Keyes,  the 
pioneer  in  the  suits,  was  buried  in  slickens,  and  his  family  lost  the  earnings 


189 


of  his  lifetime.  The  people  of  Marysville  and  Sutter  county  were,  after  a 
few  years,  compelled  to  take  up  the  fight,  but  it  was  up-hill  work.  Their 
neighhors,  in  turn,  looked  ou  with  indifference,  and  no  relief  came,  one  small 
community  could  not  overturn  the  mining  industry  from  which  came  millions 
of  money  annually.  Soon,  however,  Colusa  and  Yolo  and  Sacramento  waked 
np  to  the  matter  and  a  more  general  fight  began.  Talk  as  we  will  about 
cold-blooded  law,  but  it  is  a  fact  that  all  courts  are  swayed  by  the  necessities 
and  conditions  of  the  people.  Through  speeches,  conventions  and  news- 
papers the  discussion  became  general  all  over  the  State.  The  farming  com- 
munities of  other  portions  of  the  State  gave  expression  of  sympathy  for  the 
farmers  whose  homes  were  being  ruined.  Their  newspapers  took  up  the 
fight.  The  newspapers  of  all  Southern  California  circulated  a  supplement 
printed  at  this  office.  It  was  not  until  it  became  evident  from  all  these  ex- 
pressions of  opinion  that  hydraulic  mining  was  no  longer  consistent  with 
the  physical  conditions  of  the  country  and  the  necessities  of  the  people,  and 
the  courts  so  declared  the  law.  This  declaration  of  the  law  could  not  have 
been  had  by  any  one  man  suffering  at  the  hands  of  this  great  interest;  it 
could  not  have  been  had  at  the  demand  of  one  small  community. 

Another  interest  springs  up  in  another  direction.  A  large  portion  of  Cali- 
fornia is  worthless  without  irrigation.  People  began  to  turn  the  water  out  of 
the  streams,  and  orchards,  vineyards,  meadows,  etc.,  covered  the  desert; 
towns,  villages,  cities  sprung  up  on  the  industry  thus  created,  until  some 
hundreds  of  millions  of  property  became  dependent  upon  irrigation. 

A  few  speculators  at  the  end  of  some  of  the  streams  invoked  the  common 
law  of  England  in  order  to  get  in  a  position  to  blackmail  all  this  industry. 
These  farmers  who  stood  so  nobly  by  the  farmers  of  the  Sacramento  Valley, 
came  to  -the  Legislature  asking  for  a  law  by  which  they  might  pay  these  •  'end 
men"  a  reasonable  compensation  for  their  so-called  riparian  rights,  and  use 
the  water.  The  representatives  of  that  portion  of  the  slickens  district  most 
affected,  with  a  single  exception,  have  fought  against  the  farmers  who  stood 
by  them.  The  irrigators  have  been  abused  like  pickpockets  by  the  news- 
papers of  the  slickens  district.  The  irrigators  could  have  gotten  every  vote 
from  the  mining  counties  if  they  had  accepted  certain  amendments  which  the 
anti-slickens  people  opposed;  but  great  as  was  their  interest,  they  refused. 
Now  suppose  the  irrigation  bills  shall  be  defeated  by  the  votes  of  the  anti- 
slickens  people  ?  Will  there  not  an  antagonism  grow  up  that  will  throw  the 
irrigators  and  the  miners  together  solid?  We  say  aye!  There  will.  When 
that  comes  there  will  be  restraining  dams  authorized,  and  we  who  have 
made  the  anti-slickens  fight  will  have  only  to  thank  the  stupidity  or  the 
venality  of  our  representatives  in  the  Legislature  of  1885. 

Great  as  is  the  interest  at  stake  in  the  slickens  fight,  it  is  nothing  com- 
pared to  the  interests  involved  in  irrigation,  and  it  is  only  by  keeping  those 
people  our  friends  that  we  can  hope  to  prevent  such  things  as  restraining 
dams  and  other  dangerous  expedients.  In  all  this  the  Sun  will  have  a  bright- 
showing  record. 


190 


Irrlsration  Bill. 

We  notice  by  our  exchanges  that  the  bill  passed  the  House  with  only  IT 
votes  against  it.  This,  to  us,  is  gratifying  intelligence,  and  means  that  it 
must  become  a  law.  The  prosperity  of  Sonthern  California  is  at  stake,  and 
to  defeat  the  measure  would  turn  civilization  backward  ten  degrees.  Take 
Los  Angeles,  San  Bernardino  and  San  Diego  counties,  besides  many  others, 
and  their  future  prosperity  depends  upon  their  ability  to  use  the  water  that 
is  going  to  waste  in  their  streams.  Let  members  of  the  Senate  do  their 
duty,  and  if  not  another  bill  passes,  the  successful  passage  of  this  bill  will 
make  this  a  memorable  session. 


Tulare  Register. 

As  It  Now  Stands. 

One  of  the  effects  of  the  enforcement  of  ■  the  English  common  law  of 
riparian  rights  (wrongs)  is  now  being  practically  demonstrated  on  Tule 
river.  The  settlers  on  the  plains  south  of  the  river,  and  between  the  railroad 
and  the  foothills,  some  years  ago  constructed  what  is  known  as  the  South 
Side  Ditch  for  the  purpose  of  watering  their  lands  with  the  surplus  water  of 
the  streams.  After  the  right  of  these  farmers  to  take  water  from  the  stream, 
had  obtained  against  the  riparian  owners,  by  virtue  of  the  statutes  of  limita- 
tion, one  of  the  riparian  owners  appeared  in  court  and  brought  suit  on  behalf 
of  minor  heirs  to  restrain  the  South  Side  Ditch  Company  from  taking  any 
water  whatever  from  Tule  river.  Our  riparian  Superior  Court  granted  an 
injunction  against  the  ditch  company  restraining  them  from  turning  any  more 
water  into  their  ditch.  At  present  there  is  running  to  waste  in  Tule  river  not 
less  than  200  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  The  farmers  on  the  South  Side 
could,  if  they  were  only  permitted  to  use  the  water  now  running  to  waste, 
wet  up  thousands  of  acres  of  land  and  insure  crops  where  nothing  at  all  will 
be  raised  unless  the  rain  from  heaven  happens  to  come  just  right.  Here  we 
have  the  riparian  doctrine  in  its  true  light — one  man  owning  several  hun- 
dred head  of  cattle  sitting  idly  on  the  banks  of  the  stream  watching  his  stock 
graze,  the  river  running  bank  full,  "undiminished  in  quantity  and  unim- 
paired in  quality,"  while  an  hundred  families  on  the  plains  above  are  forced 
by  an  nujust  and  barbarous  law  to  quietly  submit  and  see  the  life-giving  flood 
flow  past  and  onward  to  the  lake.  The  amount  of  water  now  running  to  waste 
in  Tule  river  would  irrigate  and  insure  crops  up  between  30,000  and  40,000 
acres  of  land . 

Now  let  us  ask  our  recalcitrant  Senators  at  Sacramento:  Is  it  better  for 
thy  welfare  and  prosperity  of  our  State  that  this  one  cattle  king  should  enjoy 
a  monopoly  of  the  waters  of  this  stream,  only  a  small  portion  of  which  he 
can  possibly  use,  to  the  extent  of  letting  practically  all  the  water  run  to 
■waste,  than  the  farmers  above  should  be  permitted  to  divert  and  use  the  sur- 
plus for  the  production  of  crops  upon  say  35,000  acres  of  land?  If  it  is 
better  for  Tulare  county,  it  is  better  for  our  State  at  large,  for  this  one 
man  to  have  exclusive  control,  in  fact,  order  of  courage  to  file  a  complaint 


191 


against  a  delinquent  neighbor  than  to  face  the  rattle  of  musketry  or  the  roar 
of  belching  canons,  and  our  modern  reformers  possess  it  not.  Men  will  % 
stand  and  be  shot  full  of  holes,  have  their  limbs  blown  into  the  air  and  their 
flesh  hacked  from  their  bones  without  wincing,  but  attempt  to  injure  their 
business  and  they  will  whimper  like  infants.  The  man  who  can  look  a  dol- 
lar in  the  face  and  say,  "I  fear  you  not,"  will  not  tremble  the  day  he  meets 
his  God. 


San  Francisco  Alta- 

The  Will  of  the  People. 

There  is  more  than  one  Senator  among  those  who  have  identified  them- 
selves with  the  riparian  side  of  the  water  conflict  during  this  session  of  the 
Legislature,  whose  political  ambition  reaches  beyond  the  narrow  circle  of  his 
county  constituency.  Among  them  are  men  whose  aspirations  soar  as  high 
as  the  Chief  Magistracy  of  the  State.  Others  there  are  who  have  heretofore 
sought  favor  in  the  eyes  of  the  people,  and,  although  having  failed  to  secure 
State  recognition,  have  been  lifted  from  private  life  into  that  political  promi- 
nence which  afibrds  a  generous  opportunity  to  find  the  pathway  which  leads 
to  the  popular  favor.  The  sooner  these  anti-irrigation  Senator's  resign  their 
aspirations,  and  conclude  to  return  to  the  seclusion  of  private  life,  the  less 
bitter  will  be  their  disappointment.  As  Senator  Spencer  of  Napa  conceded 
in  his  anti-irrigation  speech  the  other  day,  the  majority  of  the  people  are  in 
favor  of  the  proposed  irrigation  legislation.  This  state  qf  the  popular  desire 
is  but  mildly  stated.  Applied  to  the  people  of  Southern  California  it  sounds 
ridiculously  feeble.  With  all  the  energy  and  all  the  eagerness  that  a  people 
can  feel,  who  are  prompted  by  the  instinct  of  self-preservation.  Southern 
California  will  fight  for  irrigation  laws  and  against  all  who  oppose  them. 
The  failure  of  the  Legislature  to  give  the  State  such  laws  will  never  be  par- 
doned by  those  people.  The  refusal  of  a  Senator  to  support  their  wishes  in 
this  matter  will  be  treated  as  a  demoHstration  of  enmity  to  their  welfare.  It 
will  be  well  for  Senators  to  consider  carefully  whether  the  loud  and  unanimous, 
demand  of  a  great  agricultural  community  for  salutary  laws  for  its  common, 
salvation  may  not  possibly  afford  good  ground  for  foregoing  private  judgment 
founded  merely  upon  ignorance  of  the  situation,  or  based  solely  upon  thin, 
hair-splitting  legal  objections,  invented  by  riparian  attorneys.  It  will  not  be 
surprising,  indeed  it  is  almost  certain  that  if  the  present  feeling  in  Southern 
California  continues,  and  it  is  more  likely  to  strengthen  than  become  weaker, 
the  passion  of  the  people  will  demonstrate  itself  by  exercising  a  powerful  in- 
fluence in  the  nomination  and  election  of  the  State  judiciary.  Of  course 
this  would  be  a  source  of  regret.  But  when  a  people  are  being  stung  to  death 
they  care  not  where  they  strike  nor  whom  they  crash,  so  it  be  an  enemy. 
13 


192 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Irri£fation  and  the  Railroadg. 

It  is  now  clear  that  the  power  which  has  thus  far  defeated  the  irrigation 
bills  is  the  railroads.  One  of  the  most  insidious  measures  of  obstruction  was 
the  bill  introduced  by  the  railroad  retainer,  Whitney,  and  the  whole  policy  of 
the  railway  Senators  has  been  to  prevent  the  passage  of  any  Fresno  bill  until 
the  Heath  amendment  had  been  passed.  The  monopoly  was  unwilling  that 
Southern  California  should  have  water  until  its  representatives  had  agreed 
to  relieve  the  railroads  from  taxation.  The  irrigators*  present  hope  is  that, 
now  that  the  monopoly  has  got  all  it  wants,  it  will  graciously  permit  the  ag- 
ricultural interests  of  the  southern  counties  to  be  developed.  'I  hese  hopes 
may,  perhaps,  be  fulfilled,  though  Shorb  and  other  friends  of  irrigation  are 
in  low  spirits  over  the  prospect.  If  no  irrigation  laws  are  passed  at  this  ses- 
sion, grave  inconveniences  will  result,  the  progress  of  Southern  California 
will  be  checked,  and  this  will  all  be  the  doing  of  the  monopoly. 

An  impatient  reader  complains  that  this  incessant  ding-donging  against  the 
monopoly  has  become  monotonous.  The  monotony  is  not  in  the  criticisms 
on  the  railroad.  It  is  in  its  acts.  There  is  no  pleasure  in  harping  incessantly 
on  this  one  tiling,  when  so  many  pleasauter  topics  are  offered  for  treatment. 
But  whichever  way  we  turn,  whatever  reform  the  people  seek  in  any  direc- 
tion, whatever  new  laws  it  is  attempted  to  pass,  we  are  invariably  met  by  this 
far-reaching  power,  which  frustrates  our  purposes  and  blockades  our  path. 
The  Legislature  cannot  pass  any  bills  except  by  the  consent  of  the  monopoly, 
and  this  consent  cannot  be  begged,  it  must  be  bought.  The  railroad  will  not 
let  mechanics'  liens  be  adjusted,  because  the  bill  to  adjust  them  was  intro- 
duced by  an  independent  member  who  is  not  in  corporation  pay.  It  will  not 
let  the  dry  plains  of  Sauthern  California  be  supplied  with  water  except  on  the 
condition  that  such  men  as  Keeves  of  San  Bernardino  shall  vote  for  relieving 
it  of  taxation.  The  tale  reminds  one  of  those  Middle  Age  stories  in  which  a 
man  could  only  obtain  permission  to  farm  his  own  land  on  condition  that  he 
-would  agree  that  his  feudal  lord  should  be  exempt  from  taxation.  Monoto- 
nous, indeed!  There  never  was  a  tyrant  whose  oppressions  were  not  pain- 
fully monotonous  to  the  oppressed,  and  our  tyrant  is  no  exception  to  the  rule. 
Public  censure  should  fall  not  on  the  journals  which  devote  their  colums  day 
after  day  to  exposing  the  progress  of  railway  domination  in  this  State,  but  on 
that  much  larger  class  of  journals  which  witness  the  growth  of  this  monstrous 
power  with  indifference,  or  abet  it  by  a  silence  secured  by  corruption. 


Eecord-Union. 

Immii^ration   and   Irrig^ation— Letter   from   I.    N.    Hoajf,    In&mifipration 
Commissioner    of  California. 

Editobs  Kecobd-Union: — I  am  glad  to  see  there  is  a  move  on  foot  favoring 
the  printing  of  books  and  pamphlets  setting  forth  the  many  and  great  advan- 
tages offered  by  California  to  people  seeking  new  homes  and  business — en- 


i 


193 


couraging  immigration.  This  is  a  move  in  the  right  direction.  It  will  induce 
a  fair  and  truthful  presentation  of  the  advantages  of  all  sections  of  the  State, 
and  will  place  the  expense  of  the  same  where  it  should  be — on  all  sections  to 
be  benefited. 

The  more  western  Mississippi  Valley  States  have  adopted  this  plan  and 
have  been  greatly  benefited  by  the  same  in  the  way  of  an  increase  of  taxable 
properly  and  reduction  of  rates  of  taxation.  They  have  also  found  it  greatly 
to  the  advantage  of  the  producing  and  general  business  interests  of  the  coun- 
try by  the  increase  of  the  bulk  of  transportation  and  the  consequent  decrease 
in  freight  and  passenger  rates  on  the  railroads.  Another  view  of  this  sub- 
ject may  be  presented  for  our  State: 

California  has  special  interests,  as  the  fruit,  raisin  and  wine  interests,  to 
protect  and  foster  which  is  required  stronger  and  larger  representation  in 
our  National  Legislature.  An  increase  in  population  can  only  give  us  the 
needed  power  and  influence  then. 

Bat  while  the  Legislature  is  inviting  immigrants  to  cultivate  the  soil  it 
should  not  neglect  to  enact  such  laws  as  will  on  the  one  hand  protect  the 
southern  portion  of  the  State  from  the  threatened  barrrenness  for  want  of 
authoratative  regulations  for  the  use  of  the  waters  of  the  streams  and  rivers 
in  fertilizing  the  soil,  and  on  the  other  hand  protect  the  northern  portion  of 
the  State  from  threatened  destruction  by  the  .filling  up  of  the  rivers  and 
covering  their  border  lands  with  hydraulic  mining  debris.  The  discussion  of 
these  two  subjects  in  our  Legislature  and  by  the  press  of  the  State  has  excited 
a  lively  interest  here,  especially  among  those  who  are  studying  our  State 
with  a  view  to  making  it  their  future  homes,  and  the  failure  to  settle  these 
questions  so  as  to  inspire  confidence  in  the  continued  prosperity  of  the 
whole  State  will  more  than  counteract  any  efforts  by  the  State  to  increase 
the  population. 

It  is  useless  to  spend  money  to  induce  people  to  buy  and  settle  on  lands 
that  are  worthless  without  irrigation,  unless  irrigation  is  made  possible  by 
legal  authority. 

It  is  also  equally  useless  to  invite  people  to  buy  and  build  homes  on  land 
where  there  is  constant  danger  of  destruction  of  those  lands  and  homes  and 
no  legal  authority  for  their  protection. 

The  passage  of  any  bill  or  law  to  authorize  dams  in  the  tributaries  of  our 
*ivers  would  be  construed  here  as  well  as  there,  as  a  license  to  the  hydraulic 
mining  industry  to  hold  back  and  retard  the  settlement  and  improvement  of 
all  the  valleys  of  northern  and  central  California,  and  place  the  people 
and  the  property  in  the  same  in  a  constant  and  reasonable  fear  of  total  de- 
struction, 

I  have  special  facilities  for  ascertaining  and  knowing  the  truth  of  both 
these  propositions.  Chicago  is  the  rendezvous  of  the  migratory  portions  of 
the  fifty  millions  of  people  of  the  United  States,  and  nearly  all  European 
immigration  to  America  passes  through  Chicago.  I  am  in  constant  contact 
with  these  people,  and  it  is  my  business  to  answer  all  their  questions  about 


194 


California,  the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  every  section  of  the  same.. 
The  constantly  recurring  question  about  any  locality  in  Southern  California 
is,  What  are  the  facilities  for  irrigation?  In  regard  to  northern  and  central 
California  the  equally  frequent  question  is,  as  to  its  liability  to  injury  from 
mining  debris.  If  all  these  questions  could  be  confidently  and  truthfully 
answered  by  assertions  that  good  and  efficient  laws  had  been  passed  by  our- 
Legislature  securing  the  benefits  of  irrigation,  wherever  there  is  water  for  the 
same  in  the  south,  and  prohibiting  the  deposit  of  hydraulic  mining  debris  irk 
the  rivers  when  it  may  endanger  the  lands  and  property  in  the  valleys  in  the 
north,  the  tide  of  iijimigration  to  California  within  one  year  would  be  aug- 
mented at  least  fourfold. 

If,  however,  the  present  Legislature  should  adjourn,  leaving  the  irrigation 
question  where  the  decision  of  our  Courts  have  placed  it,  I  cannot  say  much 
in  favor  of  an  increase  or  even  of  a  continued  immigiation  to  that  section. 
If  the  Legislature  should  adjourn  without  some  legislation  to  prevent  the. 
filling  of  the  rivers  with  hydraulic  mining  debris  in  the  north;  or  if  it  should 
pass  any  act,  the  tendency  of  which  would  be  to  open  up  again  the  contest, 
between  the  people  in  the  valleys  and  the  hydraulic  miners,  in  the  Courts, 
then  all  effort  at  inducing  people  to  settle  in  that  section  might  as  well  be 
abandoned.  The  State,  under  such  circumstances,  might  as  well  keep  her 
money  in  her  treasury,  and  all  immigration  commissioners  and  agents  might 
as  well  be  called  home. 

The  interest  of  the  north  and  south  in  these  questions  are  mutual,  and 
there  should  be  no  hesitancy  about  settling  both  favorably  to  each  section  and 
the  entire  State. 

It  will  not  do  for  the  Legislature  to  put  the  State  in  the  position  of  en- 
couraging people  to  settle  on  her  lands  while  it  refuses  the  necessary  legisla- 
tion to  render  these  lands  productive  and  secure  from  destruction. 

Yours,  truly, 

I.  N.  HOAG. 

Chicago,  February  25th,  1885. 


Alta  California. 

The  order  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  in  relation  to  the  lands  covered- 
by  Buena  Vista  and  Kern  Lakes,  in  Kern  county,  has  excited  a  deal  of  just 
apprehension  amongst  the  people  of  our  irrigable  districts,  for  it  is  a  chuck- 
block  in  the  way  of  securing  the  local  law  reforms  needed  as  the  foundation 
of  a  comprehensive  and  useful  system  of  irrigation,  which  will  densely  popu- 
late the  great  and  collateral  valleys  tributary  to  San  Francisco. 

The  Secretary  has  based  his  action,  properly  enough,  upon  such  informa- 
tion as  sought  him  out,  and  has  left  the  purpose  and  inspiration  of  that 
information  to  be  developed  in  the  proceeding  which  he  has  ordered. 

We  do  not  propose  here  to  make  a  showing  of  the  law  of  the  uses  of  water 
in  California,  as  that  law  is  fixed  by  the  physical  characteristics  of  this  pecu- 
liar region.    The  civil  law  of  the  continent  had  its  origin  in  natural  circum- 


195 


-stances,  and  if  we  trace  it  back  to  the  Institutes  of  Justinian,  we  find  it  a 
•perfect  reproduction  of  the  natural  wants,  rights  and  relations  of  men  who 
lived  on  the  rim  of  the  tideless  Mediterranean  Sea,  and  therefore  it  would  be 
inapplicable,  for  instance,  to  a  question  of  tide  lands  that'might  arise  on  the 
bay  of  San  Francisco  when  the  tides  ebb  and  flow. 

The  common  law  of  England,  in  like  manner,  is  a  scientific  reduction  to 
system  of  the  rights,  relations  and  natural  wants  of  a  people  living  on  a 
moist  island,  where  the  sunshine  is  rare,  fogs  frequent,  and  over  which  the 
water  of  the  sea  is  not  infrequently  carried  by  gales  of  wind. 

The  peculiarity  of  our  form  of  government  is,  that  it  may  be  adapted  to 
•widely  differing  physical  conditions,  by  leaving  local  concerns  to  local  gov- 
ernments. Irrigation  is  a  local  concern  in  California.  It  was  so  recognized 
t)y  Mexican  law,  which  set  up  a  special  rule  for  California  by  specifically 
granting  the  waters  of  this  province  for  the  use  of  the  people.  That  grant  is 
the  inheritance  of  the  people  of  this  State,  secured  by  the  treaty  of  Guada- 
lupe Hidalgo  as  completely  and  as  unimpaired  as  the  same  instrument  secured 
the  ^ants  of  land,  for  the  water  was  more  important  than  the  land,  which, 
without  it,  served  only  the  uncertain  and  unprofitable  purpose  of  stock- 
ranging. 

The  intention  of  the  information  upon  which  the  Secretary  has  acted  in 
regard  to  the  lakes  of  Kern  county  is  to  nullify  the  jurisdiction  of  California 
over  the  waters  of  Kern  river,  and  hence  destroy  entirely  the  State's  juris- 
diction over  the  whole  question  of  irrigation,  for  what  may  be  done  to  the 
Kern  valley  by  the  effect  of  a  Federal  meander  of  its  lakes  will  be  repeated 
on  Lake  Tulare,  to  destroy  the  orchards  and  vineyards  of  Fresno,  impoverish 
the  prosperous  settlements  of  that  county,  and  turn  it  back  to  the  support  of 
vagrant  herds  and  flocks.  Upon  authority  of  the  Kern  County  Californiant 
■the  editor  of  which,  Mr.  Hudnut,  is  as  conscientious  a  gentleman  as  there  if 
in  the  State,  we  learn  that  the  lakes  of  Kern  county,  which  are  the  key  to  the 
irrigation  of  that  valley,  are  not  such  bodies  of  water  as  are  pictured  in  the 
information  upon  which  the  Secretary  has  acted.  They  are  at  their  best 
estate  shallow  sheets  of  water,  endangering  health  on  their  reedy  borders,  and 
their  eflScient  drainage  would  be  a  desirable  sanitary  measure,  even  if  no 
•other  purpose  were  to  be  served.  Frequently  they  have  been  entirely  dry, 
parched  as  the  plains  on  the  zone  above  them.  They  receive  the  flood- 
waters  of  Kern  river.  If  they  are  once  established  as  bodies  of  naviga- 
ble water,  under  Federal  jurisdiction,  the  enemies  of  irrigation  stretch  the 
strong  arms  of  the  General  Government  along  both  banks  of  the  stream  that 
feeds  them  and  along  its  permanent  or  temporary  confluents,  ef&ciently  pre- 
venting the  removal  of  a  drop  of  water  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation.  If  this 
is  done  let  us  tell  the  Secretary  what  will  have  been  accomplished.  The 
Kern  valley  and  collaterals  are  capable  of  supporting,  not  only  in  comfort 
Jbut  in  Christian  luxury,  a  population  of  a  half  million  people.  The  sun  is 
never  miserly  in  that  region,  it  shines  upon  a  soil  afliuent  and  generous,  and 
ten  acres  of  that  land,  with  water  to  irrigate  it,  throws  annually  products 


196 


eqnal  in  value  to  the  crops  of  a  quarter  section  in  Iowa  or  other  interior- 
States.  With  the  land  and  water  wedded,  as  they  were  in  the  law  we  inherit 
from  Mexico,  that  valley  becomes  the  modern  instance  of  what  Moses  saw 
in  the  Promised  Land,  flowing  with  milk  and  honey  and  rich  in  corn  and 
wine. 

If  the  Secretary,  who  is  pre-eminently  a  just  man,  can  find,  upon  personal 
inspection  of  that  region,  any  utility,  present  or  prospective,  gilded  with 
results  that  approach  in  importance  those  easily  attainable  by  irrigation,  that 
may  be  reached  by  stretching  a  legal  fiction  over  those  ponds,  we  will  confess 
our  error  and  submit.  He  knows  that  we  stand  for  the  major  utilities. 
Where  there  is  a  wilderness  we  want  a  trail;  where  the  trail  is  we  want  a 
road,  and  where  the  road  is  we  want  a  railway,  and  because  we  believe  in 
making  all  natural  forces  incubate  the  highest  usefulness  we  deprecate  this 
sinister  attempt  to  turn  pondrf  and  mar.shes  into  Federal  waters,  thereby  de- 
feating irrigation  throughout  the  State,  and  denying  to  millions  who  would 
here  find  happy  homes  the  health,  wealth  and  pleasure  which  would  be  their 
right,  and  to  other  millions  the  fruits  and  food,  necessary  and  luxurious, 
Which  these  would  produce. 

Herein  we  have  not  drawn  upon  fancy  for  a  single  statement,  for  to  us  the 
whole  question  is  as  matter  of  fact  as  the  price  of  beans,  and  every  proposi- 
tion we  have  put  is  as  demonstrable  as  a  simple  problem  in  mathematics. 


Kern  County  Gazette. 

Orgfanize  Ag'ainst  Riparianism. 

The  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention  is  about  to 
issue  a  call  for  a  State  Convention.  The  especial  purpose  of  this  Convention 
will  be  to  organize  for  active  and  relentless  warfare  against  riparianism,  at  the 
approaching  election.  The  people  of  Southern  California  are  now  confronted 
with  a  danger  sufficient  to  excite  the  greatest  alarm.  A  majority  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  have  decided  that  the  English  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  is  law 
in  California.  They  have  declared  that  water  cannot  be  appropriated  for  ir- 
rigation. A  State  Legislature  ready  to  execute  the  will  of  the  people,  has 
been  throttled  by  combined  and  corrupt  efi"orts  of  a  small  minority.  We  are 
an  agricultural  community.  We  are  blessed  with  a  soil  whose  fertility  and 
productiveness  seems  incredible,  almost  marvelous  to  the  stranger.  We  have 
a  mild,  equitable  and  salubrious  climate.  But  we  look  to  the  skies  in  vain 
for  water.  The  rainfall  is  so  scanty,  and  the  heat  of  the  sun  so  intense,  that 
our  only  recourse  is  to  the  rivers.  We  must  irrigate  to  produce  and  to  live. 
We  must  have  the  right  to  appropriate  from  the  rivers,  to  irrigate.  The 
right  of  appropriation  is  to  us  as  sap  to  the  tree.  The  traveler  of  our  earlier 
days  shunned  the  San  Joaquin  valley  as  the  valley  of  death.  Over  its  desert 
area  lay  scattered  the  bones  of  men  and  baasts  thirsted  and  hungered  to 
death.  What  has  made  it  what  it  is  now?  How  is  it  that  the  school  houso 
and  the  farm  house  now  mark  the  grave  of  the  famished  wanderer?     Whence 


197 

springs  the  grain,  the  fruit  and  the  flowers,  where  once  rotted  the  carcasses 
of  starved  cattle?  From  the  appropriation  of  water  from  rivers,  by  virtue  of 
the  doc  trine  that  prior  appropriation  for  a  useful  purpose  establishes  a  right* 
It  is  the  purpose  of  the  State  Convention  just  about  to  be  called,  to  secure 
unity  of  action  in  order  to  maintain  that  right  by  which  we  came  into  exis- 
tence as  a  community,  and  by  which  we  live.  "We  want  a  Supreme  Court 
which  will  protect  that  right.  We  want  a  Legislature  which  will  properly 
secure  and  regulate  the  right  to  the  use  of  water  appropriated.  We 
want  a  Governor  who  is  absolutely  sound  on  this  question.  To 
us  the  vital  issue  of  the  coming  political  campaign  is,  appropriation 
or  riparianism.  All  other  considerations  are  secondary.  Our  people 
must  have  it  distinctly  understood  that  no  man,  be  his  politics  what 
they  may,  can  be  elected  to  an  office  high  or  low,  who  leans  favorably  towards 
riparianism.  Let  no  man  be  supported  who  is  not  an  outspoken  and  unquali- 
fied friend  of  and  believer  in  the  doctrine  of  appropriation.  Make  hostility 
to  riparianism  the  price  of  a  vote,  irom  Supreme  Judge  down  to  Justice  of 
the  Peace,  and  from  Governor  to  Supervisor.  No  half  way  policy  can  be 
sure  of  success.  The  riparian  swamp  land  preservers  and  cattle  kings  are 
numerically  few  but  powerful  on  their  wealth,  and  politicians  are  said  to 
have  itching  palms.  The  friends  of  irrigation  should  organize  at  once  all 
over  the  State.  Organized  and  united  they  can  present  a  powerful  front,  and 
can  control  the  election  of  such  officers  as  have  executive  or  official  duties 
affecting  this  question.  Not  the  least  among  the  friends  of  irrigation  should 
be  numbered  the  merchants  and  manufacturers  of  San  Francisco  and  Los 
Angeles.  The  sagacious  man  of  business  of  a  great  commercial  mart  cannot 
fail  to  see  at  a  glance  the  business  advantage  to  be  gained  in  developing  the 
San  Joaquin  valley  by  irrigation.  Instead  of  standing  as  spectators  in  our 
contest,  the  men  of  those  cities  will  be  represented  in  our  Convention,  and 
are  expected  to  aid  in  organizing  the  fight,  as  well  as  in  sharing  the  fruits  of 
our  certain  success.  Every  irrigator  and  ditch  owner  in  the  State  should  at- 
tend or  be  represented  in  this  Convention,  as  well  as  the  business  men  of 
every  city  in  the  State.  The  baleful  principle  of  riparianism  must  go  to  the 
wall. 


Los  Angeles  Daily  Herald. 

The  Herald  proposes  shortly  to  open  the  great  irrigation  question,  which 
is  one  of  the  vital  issues  of  our  current  State  politics.  One  of  our  townsmen, 
Mr.  J.  de  Barth  Shorb,  of  San  Marino,  has  been  indefatigable  in  his  raising 
of  this  issue.  It  is  of  vital  significance  in  the  development  of  Southern  Cali- 
fornia. A  single  but  momentous  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  California 
has  resurrected  the  old  riparian  law  of  England  and  made  it  applicable  to  Cal- 
ifornia. This  was  au  unfortunate  departure  in  the  jurisprudence  of  this 
State  which  ought  to  be  rectified  by  the  Supreme  Court  itself,  if  the  con- 
sciences of  its  members  admit  of  such  a  modification,  and  which  in  any  event 
ought  to  be  met  by  the  Legislature.     In  California,  as  in  all  lands  where  irri- 


198 

:gation  prevails,  and  in  which  the  shallow  volume  of  the  waters  of  the  streams 
have  little  relation  either  to  navigation  or  to  water  power,  the  old  Spanish 
Adage  of  "El  eostambre  del  Pais"  ought  to  prevail.  There  is  no  question 
but  that  the  approaching  campaign,  in  its  legislative  aspects,  will  turn  largely 
upon  the  attitude  of  candidates  upon  this  absorbing  question.  We  shall  re- 
car  frequently  to  it  in  subsequent  issues  of  the  Herald.  We  are  pleased  to 
see  that  the  San  Francisco  press  appreciate  the  gravity  of  the  situation,  and 
are  standing  in  cordially  with  a  development  of  the  water  rights  of  California 
which  make  irrigation  the  paramount  consideration  in  the  premises. 


Modesto  Herald. 

Will  not  Down. 

It  seems  that  the  large  quantity  of  rain  in  this  valley  has  not  dampened 
the  ardor  of  the  friends  of  irrigation  in  Stanislaus  county.  The  movement 
now  on  foot  is  on  the  original  plan,  and  the  new  company  proposes  to  make 
a  success  of  it  by  tapping  the  Merced  River.  There  has  been  new  life  in- 
iused  into  the  project,  and  it  seems  to  have  a  financial  backing  which  will 
-carry  it  through  without  begging  for  support  and  assistance  from  those  who 
are  not  enthusiastic  in  the  matter.  The  enterprise  has  taken  a  shape  in  a 
more  permanent  manner  from  the  actual  figures  presented  during  the  last 
summer  effort  on  the  part  of  the  men  who  were  engaged  in  the  Tuolumne 
river  enterprise,  and  something  is  due  those  men  for  the  present  endeavor. 
We  understand  that  San  Francisco  capital  has  been  enlisted,  and  that  the 
work  will  actually  begin  in  a  few  weeks.  There  is  something  in  running 
water  down  hill,  and  the  waters  of  the  Merced  will  be  easier  handled  on  this 
account,  but  there  will  be  a  lack  of  volume  when  it  is  considered  that  the 
Crocker  ditch  taps  the  Merced  far  above  the  point  to  be  tapped  by  the  con- 
templated ditch  on  this  side.  The  Crocker  ditch  has  a  capacity  of  fully  half 
of  the  volume  of  the  Merced,  and  at  low  water  time  there  will  be  very  little 
to  spare  for  the  Stanislaus  ditch.  We  hope,  however,  that  the  new  enter- 
prise may  be  carried  through  and  that  it  may  prove  successful.  It  shows 
that  all  are  not  blind  to  the  best  interests  of  the  county,  and  that  it  will 
produce  both  population  and  wealth,  which  is  always  a  valuable  consider- 
ation in  a  community. 

Alta  California. 

••The  circulation  of  the  Alta  California  is  rapidly  increasing,  especially  in 
the  Southern  part  of  the  State.  This  is  because  it  is  in  all  respects  a  good 
journal,  and,  moreover,  is  wise  enough  to  see  the  evil  of  riparianism  and  the 
vast  benefits  that  would  result  to  the  State  from  a  general  and  thorough  sys- 
tem of  irrigation.  If  it  can  impress  its  views  on  the  business  men  of  San 
Francisco,  make  them  see  that  their  interests  will  be  greatly  promoted  by 
the  advancement,  growth  and  prosperity  of  the  country,  so  that  they  will 


199 

■use  their  influence  to  elect  a  respectable,  honest  and  intelligent  delegation 
from  that  city  to  the  next  legislature,  it  will  have  accomplished  a  work,  the 
general  benefit  and  importance  of  which  will  be  beyond  estimation." 
— Bakersfield  Californian. 

The  Alta  sees  the  whole  future  of  California  in  this  question  of  Irrigation* 
A  State  must  remove  all  impediments  which  artificially  restrain  its  progress. 
There  are  certain  natural  limitations  everywhere  which  must  be  respected 
because  they  cannot  be  removed,  but  these  are  fewer  in  the  path  of  Califor- 
nia than  of  any  State  in  the  Union. 

The  natural  conditions  here  are  all  favorable  to  a  wonderful  expansion, 
and  the  hindrances  are,  as  a  rule,  artificial.  The  greatest  of  these  is  the 
doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  and  application  to  the  waters  of  the  State  of  the 
policy  of  the  dog  in  the  manger,  who  could  not  eat  the  hay  himself,  but 
would  not  let  the  horse  eat  it.  The  waters  are  greatly  more  abundant  than 
suffices  for  their  needs.  The  surplus  runs  to  the  sea,  which  needs  no  irri- 
gation, while  the  lands  that  thirst  for  it  stay  parched. 

A  law  that  places  the  ownership  of  water  in  this  State  in  men  who  have 
no  use  for  its  abundant  volume,  is  as  inapplicable  as  would  be  a  law  denying 
the  benefit  of  sunshine  to  all  but  a  few.  The  few  benefited  would  not  use 
it  all,  and  to  deny  the  surplus  to  others  would  be  an  intolerable  folly.  We 
know  that  it  is  hard  to  impress  the  importance  of  this  question  upon  our 
people,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  a  deal  in  futures.  If  the  arid  districts  were 
already  irrigated  and  populated  and  the  assertion  of  riparian  rights  should 
suddenly  stop  the  flow  of  their  zanjas,  there  would  be  an  outraged  commun- 
ity, deprived  of  the  very  waters  of  life,  and  by  its  numbers  commanding  a 
hearing  from  the  public  men  and  legislators  of  the  State.  But  the  popula- 
tion now  in  those  districts  is  sparse  and  scattered.  The  most  charming 
oases  in  the  world  are  planted  here  and  there,  where  the  water  is  still  used 
in  defiance  of  the  obstructive  riparian  law.  So  it  is  that  a  plea  has  to  be 
made  in  the  interest  of  people  to  come,  of  homes  that  are  to  be. 

When  we  strike  down  riparian  rights  we  by  the  same  blow  end  plantation 
farming  in  California,  whether  the  ]ars[e  holdings  be  used  for  grain  or  stock 
ranging.  The  plantation  farmers  are  often  blamed  for  adhering  to  a  sys- 
tem which  robs  the  land  and  keeps  out  population,  but  is  not  wholly 
their  fault.  Small  grain  farming  does  not  pay,  and  without  irrigation  small 
stock-raising  is  impossible,  and  the  big  ranchers  have  simply  been  putting . 
the  land  to  best  present  use  that  is  possible.  They  own  the  land  and  some- 
body else  owns  the  water,  and  they  must  get  all  they  can  out  of  the  unirri- 
gated  soil. 

The  San  Joaquin  Valley  is  the  counterpart,  largely,  of  Spain  in  phys- 
ical features  and  production,  and  will  repeat]  the  history  of  the  devel- 
opment of  Spanish  vineyards  when  a  denial  of  riparian  rights  terminates 
riparian  wrongs.  Formerly  sheep  ranged  where  now  the  choicest  fruits  of 
Spain  are  grown,  and  in  parts  of  California  to-day  the  finest  citrus  orchards 
■and  the  best  vineyards  are  on  old  sheep  pastures.     To  pasture  sheep  and 


200 

cattle  at  a  profit  one  man  had  to  own  or  control  thousands  of  acres,  but 
when  irrigation  changed  the  production  one  man  found  twenty  acres  up 
to  his  capacity  to  till  and  care  for,  while  forty  put  him  amongst  the  rural 
princes. 

The  Modesto  Republican,  commenting  upon  our  observations  on  the  colony 
plan  of  settlement,  says: 

"  It  is  not  absolutely  necessary  to  operate  exclusively  upon  the  colony 
plan,  although  it  is  the  best  way  to  settle  up  a  community.  But  suppose 
some  of  our  large  ranchmen  were  to  put  ten  or  fifteen  thousand  acres  of 
land  on  the  market,  cut  up  into  ten  and  twenty  acre  lots,  and  let  the  people 
of  the  Ej,st  know,  it  before  our  county  would  be  thickly  settled  with  a  thrifty 
and  prosperous  people?  Legislation,  if  properly  applied,  might  help  con- 
siderably, but  if  land  is  put  on  the  market  at  a  reasonable  figure,  there  will 
be  a  demand  for  it,  providing  arrangements  are  made  to  get  water  to  irrigate 
the  crops  when  they  need  it." 

There  is  an  element  in  the  colony  plan  that  makes  it  very  desirable.  It 
enables  the  practical  transplanliug  of  an  entire  Eastern  neighborhood, 
made  up  of  good  folk  who  have  grown  up  together  in  the  exchange  of 
neighborly  kindnesses.  In  that  way  the  Quakers  of  Ohio  planted  the  Pee- 
dee,  and  Springdale  settlements  in  Iowa,  of  which  so  many  people  retain 
pleasant  recollections.  By  the  same  method  the  Dunkards  of  Pennsylvania 
took  foothold  in  the  same  State.  Those  same  Quakers  are  repeating  the 
process  in  Southern  California,  and  there  is  need  of  them  on  the  raisiu- 
prodacing  plains  of  the  San  Joaquin. 

We  are  glad  to  see  the  papers  of  the  different  counties  speak  up  for  what 
they  think  can  be  done  in  their  own  locality.  The  Scripture  simile  of  the 
"New  Jerusalem,"  with  its  streets  paved  with  noble  minerals  and  precious 
stones,  is  the  superlative,  made  necessary  by  the  speckless  streets  of  the 
capital  of  Israel,  and  they  were  kept  clean  by  every  man  sweepiug  before  his 
own  door. 

If  the  papers  referred  to  will  hold  the  people  of  their  localities  up  to  the 
high  grade  of  this  supreme  issue,  the  net  result  will  be  a  pressure  that  will 
finally  control  their  salvation.  The  Modesto  Herald  closes  its  faithful  testi- 
mony with  this: 

"The  Alta  is  eminently  correct  so  far  as  Stanislaus  county  is  concerned,  at 
least.  No  richer  soil  exists  anywhere  under  the  sun.  The  only  trouble  with 
it  is,  it  has  been  too  productive,  and  everything  has  been  taken  from  it  and 
nothing  put  back  upon  it,  to  give  it  the  necessary  strength  to  retain  the 
moisture  it  receives  during  the  rainy  season,  so  as  to  impart  it  to  the  grow- 
ing grain  when  it  needs  it  most.  There  are  plenty  of  men  in  this  county 
who  have  made  independent  fortunes  by  raising  wheat,  but  they  cannot  do  it 
again  unless  they  can  get  water  on  the  land  when  they  need  it.  This  can  be 
done  when  the  contempl  ited  canal  is  completed,  which  probably  will  be  this 
Bummer.  When  that  is  completed  and  decent  water  rates  are  established, 
our  growth  in  population  and  wealth  will  be  marvelous,  providing  the  large 


201 


land-owners  will  cut  np  their  ranches  into  small  farms  and  put  them  on  the 
market,  which  is  quite  probable.  Buyers  will  be  plenty,  and  Stanislaus 
county's  population  will  more  than  double  within  the  next  five  years,  if  we 
will  let  the  people  know  they  can  purchase  homes,  and  that  we  want  them  to 
come  and  settle  here." 


San  Francisco  Daily  Examiner, 

Irrigation. 

The  most  important  subject  for  consideration  by  the  next  Legislature  is 
that  relating  to  irrigation.  It  is  paramount  to  all  other  economic  questions, 
and  involves  in  an  essential  degree  the  prosperity  and  development  of  the 
agricultural  resources  of  the  State,  It  is  not  merely  a  question  whether  a 
proprietor  shall  have  the  right  to  water  his  lands  from  the  flowing  streams;, 
whether  the  dectrine  of  riparian  rights  shall  be  infringed  and  the  traditions 
of  the  common  law  set  aside;  whether  a  new  law  continuing  all  usages 
should  be  adopted,  but  whether  millions  upon  millions  of  the  most  prolific 
fruitful  lands  in  California  shall  be  sacrificed  to  a  feudal  tyranny  born  in  the 
middle  ages  and  as  applicable  to  American  civilization  as  the  old  J^orman. 
trial  by  fire  or  battle. 

The  principle  of  riparian  rights,  as  defined  by  the  common  law,  applied 
to  a  country  where  the  necessity  for  irrigation  was  unknown  and  unheard, 
of.  It  can  possibly  have  no  application  to  a  country  where  irrigation  is  a 
necessity.  But  conceding  that  the  abstract  question  of  right  with  the  ri- 
pariati  proprietor,  there  is  still  another  common  law  principle  which  goes 
with  it,  and  is  of  equal  force  and  pertinence,  and  that  is,  that  "  the  interests 
of  the  few  must  yield  to  those  of  the  many."  This  latter  is  superior  to  the 
riparian  doctrine,  because  it  lies  at  the  root  of  all  organized  society. 

Had  there  been  desert  lands  in  Eugland  that  might  have  been  rendered 
fruitful  by  irrigation,  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  as  we  now  have  it, 
would  never  have  been  established.  The  doctrine  was  founded  upon  physi- 
cal conditions  of  soil  and  climate  that  bear  no  relation  whatever  to  those  in 
California.  There  were  no  deserts  to  fructify;  no  arid  wastes  to  redeem— and 
the  question  of  irrigation  could  possibly  have  formed  no  consideration  what- 
ever in  the  judgments  which  settled  the  doctrine. 

But  there  is  still  another  aspect  in  which  to  view  the  question  as  it  exists 
here  in  California;  it  is  the  well  understood  principle  of  jurisprudence  that 
all  laws,  to  be  !ust,  must  be  reasonable.  No  one  will  pretend  that  an  unjust 
law  should  endure.  If  this  bo  true,  we  ask,  is  it  reasonable.that  all  the  water 
in  California  should  be  devoted  to  the  us6  of  a  few  riparian  proprietors, 
while  all  the  rest  of  the  State  is  denied  its  benefits? 

Fifty  men  are  together  traveling  across  a  desert.  By  some  chance  one  gets 
possessed  of  a  barrel  of  water;  the  rest  are  destitute.  Would  it  be  reasonable 
for  this  man  to  hold  this  water  exclusively  for  his  own  use,  although  more 
than  he  could  consume,  while  his  companions  die  of  thirst?    That  is  pre- 


202 


«-<5iaeIy  the  attitude  occupied  by  the  supporters  of  riparian  rights  in  California. 
They  rejoice  in  the  possession  of  water  which  they  cannot  consume,  yet  hold 
for  their  exclusive  use,  while  the  rest  of  the  State  dies  of  thirst. 

Aside,  however,  from  the  legal  aspects  of  the  subject,  there  are  questions 
of  public  poliay  which  enter  into  it.  Let  us  consider,  for  example,  this 
question  of  public  policy  in  so  far  as  it  relates  to  San  Francisco.  We  are 
outside  the  pale  of  the  controversy,  but  we  nevertheless  have  an  absorbing 
interest  in  it.  We  have  built  up  here  a  magnificent  city  of  varied  industries 
and  innumerable  classes  of  business.  It  is  a  vast  mercantile  community, 
which  depends  for  its  prosperity  upon  the  progress  and  development  of  the 
country  which  geographically  is  tributary  to  it.  Lying  between  the  Sierras 
and  the  sea  are  vast  areas  of  land  containing  the  germs  of  prodigal  wealth 
which  need  only  the  quickening  agency  of  water  to  stir  into  prolific  life. 
With  this  auxiliary  agency  the  barren  plains  will  bloom  with  harvests — the 

"^ioh  soil  will  yield  wealth  and  beauty,   which,    poured  into   San  Francisco 

•^through  tributary  streams  of  commerce,  will  help  to  build  up  on  the  shores 
of  the  Pacific  a  great  commercial  metropolis.  The  future  of  San  Francisco  is 
therefore  inevitably  linked  with  the  prosperity  and  development  of  the 
State.     If  the  State  prospers  and  increases  in  wealth  and  population,  so  will 

•San  Francisco.  If  the  State  recedes — if  her  industries  are  contracted,  if  her 
wealth  diminishes — San  Francisco  must  inevitably  decline.  San  Francisco 
is  the  heart  to  which  the  blood  is  sent  from  the  extremities  of  the  physical 
body  and  is  redistributed,  giving  life  and  animation  to  the  whole  system. 
This  life-giving  essence  is  the   commerce  of  the   State.     It  is   the   restless 

-agency  which  vitalizes  everything. 

That  commerce  is  dependent  upon  production  no  one  will  deny.  Neither 
will  it  be  denied  that  production  in  California  is  dependent  upon  irrigation. 

•San  Francisco  cannot  be  supported  by  a  few  riparian  proprietors.  It  cannot 
see  the  rich  lands  of  the  State  lie  waste,  without  committing  suicide.  It  is, 
in  fact,  as  much  interested  in  distributing  the  water  of  the  streams  for  irri- 
gating purposes  as  the  farmers  who  demand  it  as  the  means  of  existence. 
All  that  San  Francisco  hopes  to  be — all  that  her  merchants  and  tradesmen 
hope  from  wealth — all  that  her  labor  looks  to  for  employment — depends 
upon  augmenting  the  growth  and  productive  capacity  of  the  Slate — and   the 

•one  essential  thing  to  this  consummation  is  irrigation. 


Kern  CcHjnty  Californian. 

The  circulation  of  the  Alta  California  is  rapidly  increasing,  especially  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  State.  This  is  because  it  is  in  all  respects  a  good  jour- 
nal, and  moreover,  is  wise  enough  to  see  the  evil  of  riparianism  and  the 
vast  benefits  that  would  result  to  the  State  from  a  general  and  thorough  sys- 
tem of  irrigation.  If  it  can  impress  its  views  on  the  business  men  of  San 
Francisco— make  them  see  that  their  interests  will  be  greatly  promoted  by  the 
advancement,   growth  and  prosperity  of  the  country,  so  that  they  will  use 


203 

their  influence  to  elect  a  respectable,  honest  and  intelligent  delegation  froi» 
that  city  to  the  next  Legislature,  it  will  have  accomplished  a  work  the  general' 
benefit  and  importance  of  which  will  be  beyond  estimation. 

THE   COMING   CAMPAIGN. 

We  are  upon  the  eve  of  a  general  election.  All  of  the  Slate  officers 
three  Judges,  a  Legislature  and  county  officers  are  to  be  elected.  The  con- 
test between  the  two  political  parties  bids  fair  to  be  a  close  one.  The  differ- 
ence in  principles  professed  by  each  in  this  State  is  scarcely  discernible. 
Any  non-partisan  question  with  powerful  support  and  of  public  importance 
can  command  the  balance  of  power  by  proper  organization  of  its  supporters... 
The  Executive  Committee  of  the  Fresno  Irrigation  Convention  have  been 
summoned  to  meet,  with  a  view  of  calling  a  State  Irrigation  Convention. 
It  is  expected  that  this  convention  will  take  a  hand  in  the  coming  campaign. 
The  advocates  of  a  complete  and  unqualified  assertion  of  the  doctrine  of 
appropriation  of  water  believe  its  importance  surpasses  all  party  questions.. 
They  are  ready  to  sacrifice  political  allegiance  to  any  party,  and  fight  any 
politician  or  aspirant  for  office  to  the  finish  who  is  weak-kneed  on  this, 
question.  They  propose  to  beat  any  man  to  death  at  the  polls  who  is  on 
the  fence.  No  candidate  need  talk  about  a  fair  compromise  between  ripar- 
ianism  and  appropriation.  The  man  who  suggests  it  is  against  appropriation. 
A  compromise  means  that  "one  side  takes  the  turkey  and  the  other  the- 
huzz&rd,"  and  the  irrigators  do  not  propose  to  take  the  buzzard! 


Alameda  Encinal. 

Irrigation, 

We  perceive  that  J.  DeBarth  Shorb,  Chairman,  has  issued  a  call  for  a  meet- 
ing of  the  Stat©  Irrigation  Committee  on  Monday,  April  5th,  to  conside*  the 
date  and  location  of  a  State  Convention,  and  take  other  preliminary  steps  for 
its  meeting.  This  movement  has  begun  none  too  early,  in  view  of  the 
magnitude  of  the  interests  to  be  considered.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that, 
the  grangers,  and  all  who  are  interested  in  the  matter  will  make  a  strenuous 
effort  to  secure  proper  action  at  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature.  No  more 
important  matter  will  come  before  that  body,  and,  in  view  of  the  probable 
large  increase  of  immigration  this  year  the  most  decided  action  should  be  taken. 
The  San  Francisco  Chronide  remarks  very  aptly  that  '  'it  was  made  evident  at 
the  last  meeting  of  the  Legislature  that  something  more  than  talk  is  neces- 
sary to  secure  the  legislation  required.  The  Fresno  Convention  did  much  to. 
educate  the  people.  It  settled  the  question  that  the  waterways,  like  the 
highways  of  the  State,  belong  of  right  to  the  people,  and  that  the  old  English 
law  of  riparian  rights  is  not  applicable  to  California.  But  when  the  appro- 
priators  went  to  Sacramento  with  their  bill  they  had  to  contend  against  three 
Glasses  of-opponents — ignorant  members,  who  did  not  understand  the  subject;. 


204 


corrupt  members,  who  wanted  to  be  bought,  and  members  interested  in  other 
bills  which  filled  the  calendar.  It  is  now  proposed  to  meet  the  Legislature  of 
1887  with  a  better  equipped  force."  As  our  cotemporary  further  suggests, 
with  great  force,  the  people  of  the  State,  and  particularly  the  citizens  of  the 
larger  cities,  should  be  impressed  with  the  fact  that  their  future  prosperity, 
and  indeed  the  welfare  of  the  entire  State  "largely  depends  upon  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  as  the  law  of  the  State — to  the  end 
that  every  drop  of  water  in  the  streams  which  flow  from  the  Sierra  shall  be 
made  to  do  its  duty.  Our  well  being,  our  growth,  depend  on  the  develop- 
ment of  our  back  country,  upon  the  settlement  of  the  lower  Saoramento  and 
San  Joaquin  valleys  by  small  farmers  who  cultivate  twenty,  thirty,  fifty  or 
one  hundred  acres  in  diversified  crops,  and  especially  in  grapes  and  fruit. 
These  small  farms  cannot  be  cultivated  without  water,  and  the  water  cannot 
be  had  if  the  doctrine  of  ripariau  rights  continues  to  prevail,  and  in  the  com- 
ing election  not  an  ofl&ce  should  be  neglected;  not  a  county  overlooked.  This 
fall  no  man  should  be  nominated,  or  if  nominated,  should  be  elected,  unless 
he  is  not  only  sound,  but  awake  to  the  vital  importance  of  the  subject.  The 
class  of  citizens  who  are  interested  in  irrigation  is  large  enough,  if  they  com- 
bine, to  defeat  any  candidate  of  whom  they  are  not  sure;  and  to  be  sure,  they 
should  endeavor  to  secure  the  nomination  of  men  who  are  personally  inter- 
ested in  the  question,  and  so  reliably  safe  that  it  would  be  unnecessary  to  de- 
mand pledges  from  them.  If  the  Convention  does  its  works  thoroughly,  ap- 
propriation will  be  the  law  of  California  by  March,  1887. 


Kern  County  Galifornian. 

What  Mugt  Be. 

It  is  evident  that  the  irrigation  interests  of  the  State,  represented  by  the 
■^tate  Irrigation  Convention,  will  engage  in  the  fight  during  the  coming  polit- 
ical campaign  and  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  with  a  spirit,  vigor 
and  determination  that  will  totally  eclipse  all  their  previous  efi'orts.  They 
want  the  riparian  doctrine,  that  fossilized  precedent  bound  Judges  are  hesi- 
tating over  totally  expurgated  from  the  laws  of  the  State,  if  it  is  there  at  all, 
and  they  contend  that  it  is  not.  Moreover,  they  must  and  will  have  a  complete 
system  of  irrigation  laws — placing  the  waters  of  the  State  under  so  just  and 
thorough  a  system  of  control  that  the  benefit  may  be  extended  to  the  widest 
possible  limit,  both  as  to  individuals  assisted  and  lands  fertilized.  If  neither 
of  the  old  parties  think  that  irrigation  deserves  a  place — the  prominent  place 
— in  their  platforms,  the  irrigationists  will  organize  a  party  of  their  own,  nom- 
inate State,  Legislative  and  Judicial  tickets  and  elect  them.  This  time  they 
will  be  early  in  the  field,  with  their  strength  ten  times  renewed,  and  will  pat 
•forth  ever  increasing  efforts  until  victory  is  assured. 


205 
Oakland  Times. 

The  Appropriators. 

One  of  the  most  important  measures  that  was  ever  considered  by  onr  State 
Legislature  will  be  brought  before  that  body  at  its  next  session.  California 
has  reached  a  period  in  her  history  when  we  must  begin  to  prepare  for  the 
Lirgest  immigration  that  e  ver  flocked  to  any  State  in  the  Union.  All  eyes 
are  upon  us,  and  at  present  we  are  not  in  a  condition  to  accommodate  even  a 
fraction  of  the  people  who  will  visit  our  shores  during  the  next  few  years,  for 
the  purpose  of  making  rural  homes.  We  are  not  ready  for  a  large  population, 
for  the  reason  that  the  large  Upper  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys, 
comprising  the  richest  lands  in  the  world,  are  not  artificially  watered,  on  ac- 
count of  our  State  law,  as  it  now  stands.  Our  law  on  water  ways  was  ab- 
sorbed from  the  English  Kiparian  Rights,  viz:  that  water  cannot  betaken 
from  any  stream  if  a  single  person  owning  land  on  said  stream  objects  to 
such  a  proceeding.  This  law  might  be  applicable  to  England,  but  it  most 
certainly  does  not  fit  the  case  in  California,  for  a  large  proportion  of  our 
land  in  the  above  mentioned  valleys  is  almost  useless  without  irrigation. 
And  why?  Simply  because  at  present  it  will  take  at  least  one  thousand  acres 
of  the  best  land  to  support  a  family,  and  we  know  farmers  in  Stanislaus  and 
Merced  counties  who  have  a  mighty  hard  time  of  it  to  make  both  ends  meet, 
even  with  farms  of  from  one  thousand  to  til  teen  hundred  acres.  Now  by 
taking  a  small  portion  of  the  water  from  the  Toulumne,  Stanislaus,  Merced 
and  San  Joaquin  rivers,  a  country  capabl-:!  of  supporting  several  millions  of 
people,  is  at  once  thrown  open  to  our  Eastern  friends,  who  are  anxious  to 
come  here.  "How  can  that  be?"  the  thoughtless  reader  will  ask.  Simply 
because,  under  the  irrigation  system,  a  tract  of  from  twenty  to  forty  acres  of 
land  will  support  a  family,  and  put  a  few  hundred  dollars  in  bank  every  year; 
whereas  at  present,  one  thousand  acres  will  hardly  keep  the  wolf  from  the 
door  of  the  same  family,  "But  that  is  guess  work,"  some  one  will  say.  It 
is  not  guess  work.  We  have  facts  and  figures  to  prove  what  we  say.  The 
colonies  of  Fresno  county  are  a  living  example  of  what  irrigation  will  do  for 
the  San  Joaquin  valley.  In  1876  the  writer  visited  that  county  and  was 
taken  out  to  the  first  colony,  by  Tom  Hughs,  the  projector  of  the  scheme. 
The  first  ditch  had  just  been  completed  and  settlers  were  coming  in  slowly. 
They  were  not  exactly  discouraged,  but  they  did  not  believe  that  they  would 
be  able  to  make  a  living  on  their  little  forty-acre  farms.  The  whole  country 
looked  like  a  desert  and  land  could  be  purchased  for  a  few  dollars  an  acre. 
Hughs  was  confident,  however,  of  what  irrigation  would  do  for  the  county, 
and  to-day  one  will  find  the  same  farmers,  who  looked  blue  in  '76,  and  thou- 
sands of  others,  who  could  not  be  induced  to  take  one  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars  an  acre  for  their  little  ranches,  for  they  have  been  able  to  make  not 
only  a  comfortable  living,  but  can  boast  of  a  large  bank  account  and  other 
property  which  would  make  them  independent  for  the  rest  of  life,  without 
doing  another  lick  of  work.  This  is  what  irrigation  has  done  for  them,  and 
proves  what  the  rest  of  this  large  area  of  country  would  be  if  it  were  not  for 


206 


the  detestable  riparian  rights,  which  is  the  friend  of  no  man  except  the  man 
who  owns  large  tracts  of  land  along  the  watercourses,  and  wants  to  use  it  for 
Btockraising  only.  For  years  these  large  cattle  kiugs  of  Fresno,  Kern,  Tulara 
and  Merced  counties  have  been  fighting  the  irrigators  in  the  courts,  and  the 
people,  seeing  no  chance  lor  relief  so  long  as  riparian  rights  blocked  the 
courts,  decided  to  bring  the  matter  before  the  Legislature.  They  called  an 
appropriator's  convention  at  Fresno,  shortly  before  the  last  session  of  the 
Legislature,  and  prepared  a  bill,  but  the  subject  was  new,  to  our  Northern 
law-makers,  at  least,  and  nothing  was  done  during  the  session.  The  appro- 
priators  learned  a  lesson,  however;  they  found  that  the  cattle  kings  were 
ready  to  meet  them  at  every  point  and  fight  the  measure  with  money  and 
brains.  They  have  not  been  idle,  however,  since  the  Legislature  adjourned, 
but  have  strained  every  energy  to  make  the  people  thoroughly  acquainted 
with  the  situation,  and  we  are  firmly  convinced  that  nine-tenths  of  the  entire 
population  now  understand  that  without  irrigation  the  largest  and  most  fer- 
tile portion  of  California  must  remain  almost  tenantless;  whereas  if  the 
riparian  rights  law  is  wiped  off  of  our  statute  books,  the  San  Joaquin  valley 
will  soon  become  the  prosperous  home  of  several  millions  of  people,  and  as  a 
natural  consequence  Oakland  will  be  the  distributing  point.  Therefore  we 
cannot  afford  to  send  a  single  man  to  the  next  Legislature  who  is  not  a  square 
up  and  up  irrigation  man. 

Eesources  of  California. 

Riparian  Riglits. 

The  people  of  California  are  now  entirely  awake  to  the  importance  of  irri- 
gation, and  the  necessity  for  laws  establishing  and  regulating  the  use  of  the 
waters  of  the  natural  streams  of  the  State  for  that  purpose  is  generally  con- 
ceded. This  sentiment  is  bound  to  find  expression  through  the  law-making 
powers  which  will  result  in  defining  the  rights  of  irrigators  and  riparian 
claimants.  This  is  a  question  in  which  the  vital  interests  of  our  State  are  in- 
Tolved,  for  without  irrigation  an  immense  area  of  fertile  and  valuable  land 
could  never  be  cultivated,  and  would  remain  barren  as  the  Desert  of  Sahara. 
We  are  in  favor  of  the  condemnation  of  the  rights  of  all  riparian  owners 
under  the  old  common  law;  an  equitable  compensation  for  such  rights;  and 
the  establishment  by  legislation  of  the  right  to  use  the  waters  of  the  natural 
streams  of  this  State  for  this  purpose  of  irrigation,  and  such  other  regula- 
tions as  will  prevent  the  monopoly  of  water  and  the  unjust  taxation  of  those 
who  make  a  lawful  use  of  it. 


Oakland  Times. 

We  are  glad  to  see  that  our  contemporaries  are  beginning  to  study  up  the 
irrigation  question.  The  whole  thing  is  in  a  nut-shell.  Are  we  to  live  by  the 
old  English  riparian  rights  law,  which  holds  that  water  is  a  part  of  the  realty, 
and  a  man  living  above  us  has  no  right  to  take  the  water  from  the  stream  which 


207 


runs  through  our  land  than  he  has  to  absorb  all  the  air  about  our  premises, 
or  shall  we  distribute  this  water  equally  over  the  land  and  give  every  man  a 
chance  to  utilize  what  God  has  given  him?  The  most  of  our  streams  are  so 
abundantly  fed  from  the  mountains  that  there  is  no  danger  of  a  scarcity  of 
water,  and  we  know  that  there  is  a  plenty  for  all;  therefore  we  are  in  favor 
of  the  irrigators  first,  last  and  all  the  time.  They  must  have  water — and 
the  sooner  our  legislature  sees  it  in  that  light  the  better  will  it  be  for  the 
whole  State. 


Visalia  Weekly  Delta. 

Irrigfatien. 

The  question  taking  precedence  of  all  others  to  be  considered  by  the  next 
Legislature,  is  that  of  irrigation.  Time  is  being  taken  by  the  forelock  this 
year.  The  committee  appointed  by  the  last  State  Convention  to  take  charge 
of  the  matter,  will  meet  in  Fresno  next  week  and  arrange  to  have  the  mat- 
ter brought  before  the  people  immediately.  Conventions  of  the  several 
political  parties  will  be  held  soon,  and  in  order  to  know  how  prospective 
candidates  for  the  Legislature  stand,  and  that  the  subject  may  be  fully  dis- 
cussed before  that  body  meets,  it  is  necessary  to  commence  work  at  once.  A 
determined  effort  was  made  by  those  in  favor  of  appropriating  water  for  irri- 
gation to  have  enacted  laws  that  could  settle  this  vexed  question,  and  an 
opposition  fully  as  determined  on  the  part  of  the  riparian  proprietors  suc- 
ceeded in  preventing  legislation.  The  matter  was  not  understood  by  people 
outside  of  the  irrigating  districts  of  the  State,  and  the  support  of  the  city 
press  and  the  non-irrigating  counties  was  silent  or  lukewarm  in  its  support, 
with  a  few  notable  exceptions.  Now  all  is  changed.  Every  county  in  this 
valley  is  heartily  interested  in  irrigation,  and  among  the  latest  to  give  the 
matter  increased  attention  is  our  neighboring  mountain  county  of  Inyo,  in 
which  several  irrigating  canals  are  about  to  be  constructed. 

The  large  amount  of  literature  concerning  this  subject  which  has  been  cir- 
culated throughout  the  State  during  the  past  two  years,  and  the  discussion 
in  the  San  Francisco  dailies  recently,  is  having  its  effect,  and  people  in 
counties  where  irrigation  is  unnecessary,  are  learning  that  they  will  not  be 
injured  in  any  way  by  allowing  the  southern  and  interior  counties  to  divert 
water  from  the  streams  in  order  to  make  millions  of  acres  of  otherwise  dry 
land  habitable  and  productive.  There  is  no  reason  why  one  person  at  the 
mouth  of  a  river  should  be  able  to  prevent-  hundreds  and  perhaps  thousands 
of  others  from  making  a  living,  wheji  they  may  do  so  by  using  a  part  of  the 
waters  that  must,  according  to  the  common  law  of  England,  which  a  few 
judges  persist  in  blindly  following,  be  allowed  to  run  to  the  sea  undiminished 
in  quantity  and  unimpaired  in  quality.  There  is  no  reason  why  the  riparian 
owner  and  the  appropriator  should  be  at  daggers'  points.  If  one  quarter  of 
the  money  spent  in  litigation  were  expended  in  an  endeavor  to  setilethe  mat- 
ter fairly,  it  would  be  found  that  the  supply  of  water  is  amply  sufficient  for 
14 


208 


all.  In  Fresao  county,  the  life-blood  of  which  has  been  tbe  water  distributed 
through  its  network  of  irrigating  canals;  it  is  now  necessary  to  drain  land 
that  was  formerly  a  part  of  the  "San  Joaquin  desert  plaius."  Tbe  ground 
has  become  thoroughly  saturated,  and  is  drained  into  the  sloughs  that  empty 
into  the  San  Joaquin  river.  It  is  so  also  in  those  parts  of  Tulare  county  that 
have  been  irrigated  for  a  number  of  years.  The  water  that  has  been  poured 
upon  the  dry  lands  of  the  valley  are  not  lost,  but  are  working  their  way  in 
the  sandy  sub-strata  to  the  lake,  and  as  a  small  amount  of  the  water  at  first 
used  for  irrigation  is  now  necessary,  a  smaller  quantity  will  be  diverted  from 
the  natural  channels  to  irrigate  the  same  land,  and  that  which  is  diverted  will 
work  its  way  back  again.  The  supply  is  great  enough  for  all  riparian  owners 
and  appropriators,  and  the  chances  for  the  passage  of  the  bills  framed  by  the 
State  Irrigation  Convention,  or  others  similar,  are  excellent. 


Oakland  Tribnne. 

The  Irrij^ation  Issae. 

The  next  Eepublican  State  Convention  will  have  to  deal  with  a  new  issue 
which  has  not  heretofore  had  political  consideration.  The  irrigation  inter- 
ests, extending  throughout  the  State,  but  mainly  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley 
and  the  southern  counties,  have  gradually  attained  a  magnitude  hitherto 
unknown.  They  are  organizing  for  efifective  work  in  the  next  campaign 
with  the  intention  of  forcing  themselves  into  politics  and  demanding  what- 
ever their  power  will  enable  them  to  take  in  the  way  of  measures  for  their 
protection. 

In  view  of  this  fact  it  vdll  be  well  to  consider  who  they  are,  what  are  their 
claims,  and  why  they  venture  into  the  domain  of  politics. 

Irrigation  is  carried  on  all  over  the  State,  but  the  principal  irrigating  coun- 
ties are  San  Bernardino,  San  Diego,  Los  Angeles,  Kern,  Tulare,  Fresno,  Mer- 
ced, Stanislaus,  and  San  Joaquin.  Most  of  the  land  in  these  counties  is  of  the 
character  known  as  desert  land,  and  is  unfit  for  cultivation  without  irrigation. 
The  population  thrives  by  irrigation.  Irrigation  is  carried  on  through  canals, 
diverting  water  from  the  various  streams.  The  right  to  use  the  water  is  secured 
by  appropration  long  sanctioned  by  usage  and  custom  and  by  the  court?,  and 
embodied  finally  into  the  Code.  So  absolutely  is  irrigation  dependent  on  the 
right  of  appropriation  that  in  a  legal  sense  the  words  are  almost  interchange 
able.    Without  appropriation  water  cannot  be  had  for  irrigation. 

There  is  an  old  common-law  doctrine  that  the  waters  of  a  stream  must  flow 
within  the  banks  without  diversion,  and  under  this  doctrine  the  use  of  its 
water  for  irrigation  or  any  other  than  stock  or  domestic  purposes,  is  for- 
bidden. But  no  one  imagined  that  this  law  was  or  would  ever  become  a  rule 
ot  property  in  this  State  because  it  was  inapplicable  to  our  dry  climate  and 
meager  rainfall. 

A  little  over  a  year  ago,  however,  three  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  held 
for  appropriation,   whilst    the   majority,   four  of  the   Judges,    resurrected 


209 


the  old  English  common  law  doctrine,  holding  that  the  water  of  a  stream 
cannot  be  used  for  irrigation  if  any  one  owning  land  upon  its  banks  says  no. 

At  this,  a  common  fear  seized  every  one  connected  with  irrigation,  lest 
this  shonld  become  the  established  rule  of  property  in  this  State,  to  the  utter 
destruction  of  irrigation. 

They  immediately  appealed  to  the  Legislature  for  some  protection,  but  ob- 
tained nothing.  Since  then  their  alarm  has  increased  almost  to  a  panic. 
They  are  arming  for  a  fight.  Their  just  demands  have  been  denied,  and  they 
are  about  to  use  their  united  power  to  take  by  political  force  that  which  they 
are  refused. 

These  irrigating  counties  poll  about  thirty-three  thousand  votes.  They  are 
greatly  exercised  over  this  question.  Irrigation  is  their  bread  and  butter. 
Politics  naturally  sink  out  of  sight  with  a  people  under  such  conditions.  The 
Eepublican  State  Convention  ought  to  recognize  the  justice  of  the  irrigators' 
claims  and  take  a  stand  for  the  right  of  appropriation  if  it  would  secure  the 
the  lion's  share  of  this  vote.  Alameda  county  ought  to  send  a  delegation  to 
the  Convention  who  are  properly  impressed  wilh  the  importance  of  develop- 
ing the  interior  by  irrigation.  A  flourishing  country  builds  up  a  populous 
<rity. 


Kern  County  Californian. 

The  Irrigation  Q,aestion. 

Says  the  Record- Union:  "  The  irrigation  question  is  coming  to  the  front 
as  one  of  the  most  important  topics  to  command  public  attention  in  the 
coming  campaign,  and  the  subsequent  legislative  session.  We  adhere  to  our 
doctrine  that  a  true  policy  is  for  the  State  to  convert  mountain  canyons  into 
storage  basins,  where  practicable,  and  save  for  irrigating  uses  the  waste 
waters  of  winters,  and  those  from  the  melting  snows  of  early  summer.  On 
the  basis  of  a  storage  system  the  irrigation  problem  can  be  greatly  simplified. '  * 

The  irrigation  problem  could  be  still  further  simplified  on  the  basis  of  erad- 
icating all  traces  of  the  alleged  English  common  law  of  riparian  rights.  More- 
over a  storage  system  cannot  be  established  unless  this  is  first  done.  Dams, 
for  reservoirs,  must  be  built  either  on  the  streams  themselves  or  their  triba- 
laries,  and  this  the  end  men  would  object  to.  They  claim,  under  the  common 
law  of  England,  which  they  allege  is  in  force  in  this  State,  all  the  water  that 
flows  in  the  streams,  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  in  flood  time  and  drouth,  and 
they  would  object  to  impounding  any  portion  of  those  waters  if  it  were  for 
the  purpose  of  keeping  up  the  supply  for  diversion  and  not  to  flow  down  to 
them.  Every  mountain  canyon  down  which  water  flows  in  time  of  rain  or 
snow  melting  is  the  tributary  of  some  stream.  Before  capital  will  engage  in 
reservoir  building  they  must  be  assured  of  immunity  from  the  obstructionists 
referred  to  who  have  made  so  much  trouble.  For  the  present,  with  the  ban 
of  riparianistn  removed,  there  is  water  enough  in  the  streams  for  all  pur- 
poses. Let  it  be  used  and  the  means  would  accumulate,  now  wanting,  to 
■build  a  storage  system  when  needed. 


210 


Tulare  Register. 

"We  are  informed  by  one  of  our  merchants  who  has  just  spent  a  week  or 
more  in  San  Francisco,  that  the  merchants  in  that  city  are  really  taking  quite 
an  interest  in  irrigation  matters.  They  make  earnest  inquiries  in  regard  to 
irrigation  and  begin  to  realize  that  their  own  prosperity  as  well  as  ours  de- 
pends upon  a  just  solution  of  this  problem.  This  question  is  new  to  the  bus- 
iness men  of  San  Francisco  and  they  hardly  feel  able  to  grapple  with  it 
themselves,  and  look  to  the  sections  immediately  interested  for  a  solution  of 
the  problem.  This  is  as  it  should  be.  We,  of  the  Valley,  are  capable  of 
evolving  such  a  system  as  the  State  needs.  We  have  been  brought  face  to 
face  with  irrigation,  and  experience  has  taught  us  what  we  want.  But  it  is 
not  enough  to  know  what  is  needed.  We  must  have  the  thing  needed,  and 
want  assistance  in  procuring  it,  and  therein  our  city  friends  can  help  us 
materially.  In  fact,  it  is  going  to  be  well  nigh  impossible  for  us  to  obtain 
what  we  need  without  the  assistance  of  San  Francisco.  That  the  assistance 
may  not  be  rendered  by  their  electing  men  to  the  "Legislature  who  know  all 
about  the  question  and  are  themselves  capable  of  drafting  such  bills  as  are 
needed;  but  if  they  are  so  disposed  they  can  haul  off  their  coats  and  go  into 
the  next  campaign  and  send  from  San  Francisco  a  delegation  ot  honest, 
capable  men,  whose  judgment  will  be  more  influenced  by  argument  than  by 
money.  It  is  the  man  who  needs  to  be  'seen'  before  being  convinced  whom 
-we  most  fear." 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

The   Irrigationists. 

The  irrigationists  have  gone  to  work  the  right  way.  They  propose  to  or- 
ganize in  every  precinct  in  their  portion  of  the  State,  and  see  to  it  that  they 
are  duly  represented  in  the  county  conventions.  The  measures  which  their 
interest  and  the  interest  of  the  whole  State  demand  would  have  become  laws 
in  1885  but  for  the  factious  opposition  of  a  small  knot  of  politicians  whose 
purposes  were  well  known.  The  names  of  these  men  are  no  secret;  they  will 
be  found  recorded  in  the  journals  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly;  they  were 
published  over  and  over  again  in  the  correspondence  and  editorials  in  this 
paper.  Several  of  these  men  will  want  a  renomination;  then  will  come  the 
time  for  the  irrigationists  to  get  in  their  work.  No  man  who  was  faithless  to 
the  cause  of  irrigation  last  winter  should  have  an  opportunity  of  visiting  Sac- 
ramento again  as  a  public  servant. 

If  the  convention  which  meets  here  on  May  20th  maps  out  its  work  with 
care,  it  can  secure  a  solid  body  of  members  from  the  central  and  southern 
counties  pledged  to  irrigation  first,  last  and  all  the  time.  No  party  conven- 
tion will  dare  to  nominate  a  man  who  is  shown  to  have  destroyed  the  cause  in 
1885;  if  it  does,  the  duty  of  the  people  is  clear;  they  should  support  his  op- 
ponent. Irrigation  is  the  one  all-important  question  for  the  southern  coun- 
ties.   In  choosing  new  men,  conventions  should  require  them  to  give  pledges 


211 


that  they  will  make  irrigation  their  first  concern;  that  they  will  not  allow  the 
bills  framed  by  the  committeo  to  be  delayed  or  set  aside  by  other  measures; 
that  they  will  stand  by  them,  in  season  aud  out  of  season,  till  they  become 
laws.  If  the  irrigationists  tackle  their  work  in  this  spirit,  they  cannot  help 
but  succeed. 


The  Daily  San  Diegan. 

Irrig^ation. 

The  English  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  that  has  been  judicially  decided 
by  the  highest  court  of  resort  in  this  State  to  be  the  law  in  California,  will 
not  be  accepted  by  the  agricultural  interests  of  this  State  as  a  final  settle- 
ment of  the  principle  involved  in  the  matter  of  irrigation.  This  decision 
practically  destroys  not  only  one  of  the  most  valuable  industries,  but  strikes 
a  fatal  blow  at  the  future  prosperity  of  the  State.  In  many  counties  the 
right  to  irrigate  by  diverting  and  appropriating  water  from  the  natural  water 
ways  of  the  State  is  all  that  gives  value  to  a  locality,  or  invests  it  with  condi- 
tions essential  to  human  life. 


Daily  Examiner. 

Irrigation, 

We  surrender  an  unusual  amount  of  space  this  morning  to  the  address  of 
the  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention.  The  over- 
whelming importance  of  the  question,  however,  fully  justifies  us  in  doing 
80.  No  more  important  subject  ever  came  before  the  people  of  California. 
It  lies  at  the  root  of  all  our  prosperity  and  material  development  and  ad- 
vancement. It  is  neither  sectional  nor  personal,  but  universal.  It  pervades 
the  State  from  end  to  end.  It  includes  all  classes  of  population,  and  over- 
shadows in  magnitude  and  importance  every  other  issue. 

It  does  all  this  because  without  irrigation,  provided  for  bylaw  and  put 
beyond  the  domain  of  question  or  dispute,  California  must  stop  in  its  career 
of  marvelous  progress  if,  indeed,  it  does  not  have  to  return  to  the  barren 
conditions  from  which  a  part  of  the  State  has  been  rescued  by  tireless  en- 
ergy and  enterprise. 

The  address  we  print  this  morning  covers  the  whole  ground  in  controversy, 
and  graphic  as  is  the  statement  the  Executive  Committee  submits,  it  is  neither 
too  highly  colored  nor  overdrawn.  The  question  is  one  of  progress  against 
decay;  of  the  possibilities  of  a  splendid  future,  in  which  the  highest  degrees 
of  enlightened  and  material  development  and  the  most  profitable  and  pro- 
ductive cultivation  of  the  soil  contrast  with  the  desolation  of  utter  barren- 
ness. 

The  proposition  that  the  soil  of  nine-tenths  of  the  State  cannot  be  culti- 
vated without  irrigation  is  too  obvious  for  controversy,  and  that  there  is 
water  enough  in  the  streams  which  can  be  rendered  available  for  this  pur- 
pose is  also  beyond  dispute.    That  every  commercial,  agricultural  and  basi- 


212 


ness  interest  that  we  have  already,  or  may  have  in  the  future,  is  dependent 
upon  the  lawful  diversion  of  the  water  from  the  streams  is  also  obvious. 

The  question  is,  Shall  the  legislative  assistance  needed  be  given?  The 
people  have  it  in  their  power  to  accomplish  this  great  necessity.  They  are 
the  source  of  power,  the  tribunal  from  which  there  is  no  appeal.  But,  to 
render  their  efforts  intelligent  and  effective,  they  must  have  a  specific  organ- 
ization and  definite  ends.  These  are  provided  for  in  the  address,  and  the 
plan  proposed  should  command  the  very  widest  possible  attention  and  the 
thoughtful  consideration  of  every  man  in  the  State.  Every  one  is  inter- 
ested in  the  subject.  The  citizen  of  the  city,  equally  with  the  citizen  of  the 
country,  will  find  in  this  question  the  hinge  upon  which  the  future  of  Cali- 
fornia will  turn.  It  embraces  every  vital  interest,  every  hope  and  prospect 
of  the  future,  and  the  appeal  which  has  been  made  addresses  itself  to  the 
patriotism  of  the  individual  and  the  sense  of  right  of  the  public. 


Pacific  Rural  Press. 

The  Irrig^ation.  Movement. 

On  next  Monday,  April  5th,  the  executive  committee  of  the  Irrigation  As- 
sociation will  meet  in  Fresno  to  fix  upon  a  time  and  place  for  holding  the 
State  Irrigation  Convention.  The  idea  is  to  hold  a  general  assembly  for  sev- 
eral days  for  the  purpose  of  thorough  discussion  and  action  upon  the  matters 
affecting  the  interests  of  those  who  grow  products  by  irrigation  water.  Much 
of  the  future  growth  and  prosperity  of  the  State  depends  upon  the  correct 
solution  of  problems  connected  with  irrigation.  It  is  important  that  meas- 
ures should  be  undertaken  to  secure  a  better  understanding  of  these  matters. 
It  is  necessary  that  the  coming  Legislature  should  act  upon  the  subject  and 
enact  laws  which  shall  meet  the  needs  of  the  people  and  the  growth  of  the 
State.  The  subjects  were  brought  before  the  last  Legislature  and  a  strong 
effort  made  to  secure  legislation,  but  without  effect.  Much  of  the  difficulty 
laid  in  the  ignorance  of  many  of  the  legislators  whose  lives  have  been  cast 
beside  city  walks  rather  than  beside  running  streams.  By  beginning  early 
this  year  it  is  hoped  that  men  can  be  elected  who  have  clear  ideas  upon  the 
subject  and  can  be  trusted  to  legislate  intelligently.  It  seems  to  us  that  moat 
good  can  be  done  by  a  convention  in  San  Francisco,  because  here  are  the 
most  people  who  need  a  little  hydroculture,  and  here,  too,  can  be  reached 
the  greater  number  of  those  who  have  influence  in  legislation.  People  living 
in  irrigated  districts  do  not  need  instruction  in  their  progress  and  their  needs. 

We  are  pleased  to  note  indications  that  there  is  a  better  understanding  of 
the  points  at  issue  in  the  newspapers  of  the  State  and  the  need  of  legislation, 
which  shall  settle  the  conflict  between  laws  and  precedents  and  conditions, 
and  give  us  a  plain  course  for  the  development  of  our  arid  areas.  Much  will 
depend  upon  the  selection  which  shall  be  made  this  fall  for  State  officers  and 
legislators,  and  there  seems  to  be  a  disposition  to  make  soundness  on  the 
"water  question  a  qualification  for  support  by  those  in  that  interest.     We  do- 


213 


not  object  to  judging  a  man  rather  by  his  industrial  value  and  wisdom  than 
by  his  political  affiliations.  There  are  many  ways  by  which  men  who  are 
ready  to  work  for  the  advantage  of  the  greatest  numbers  can  make  themselves 
useful  in  the  coming  Legislature.  If  both  parties  will  bear  these  facts  in 
mind,  they  may  both  give  us  nominations  which  will  be  acceptable,  but  if 
either  candidate  should  be  in  doubt  whether  he  should  serve  the  few  or  the 
many,  the  party  which  names  him  will  have  a  heavy  load  to  carry.  The 
floating  vote  promises  to  increase  from  year  to  year  in  our  elections,  and  the 
balance  of  power  is  already  clearly  in  its  wake.  We  trust  the  committee  next 
Monday  at  Fresno  will  issue  a  ringing  address  and  make  wise  arrangements 
for  coming  popular  meetings. 


Fresno  Daily  Evening  Expositor. 

On  the  Riglit  Track. 

The  San  Francisco  Alia  is  on  the  right  track.  It  espoused  the  irrigation 
cause  something  more  than  a  year  ago,  and  has  been  consistently  at  work 
ever  since  trying  to  interest  the  business  men  at  the  Bay  City,  and  the  people 
generally,  in  the  cause  of  irrigation.  It  sees  that  irrigation  will  build  up  and 
fill  with  people  the  great  valleys  of  the  State,  and  that  by  so  doing  the  busi- 
ness interests  of  San  Frencisco  will  be  built  up  and  an  era  of  prosperity  in- 
augurated.    Speaking  of  irrigation,  in  a  late  issue,  it  says: 

"  We  want  more  people  in  California;  we  want  more  production,  more 
school  houses,  churches,  Sunday  schools,  houses,  homes,  and  the  greatness 
they  join  hands  in  bringing.  We  know  that  on  the  plains  which  can  be  irri- 
gated when  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  is  discarded,  there  will  spring  up 
palm -shaded  homes  in  the  midst  of  vineyards  and  orchards,  where  there  is  no 
Winter,  and  where  the  settler  need  not  even  pray  for  rain,  for  he  will  control 
the'time  and  quantity  of  water  that  shall  go  upon  his  land,  and  his  prayers 
may  go  for  other  spiritual  or  temporal  blessings  of  which  men  are  always  in 
need. 

"The  irrigable  districts,  when  so  settled  and  tilled,  will  produce  articles 
that  are  staple  the  world  over,  and  are  nowhere  produced  as  well,  ^he  Illi- 
nois farmer  who  has  dodged  the  frosts  and  showers  to  get  in  his  corn,  has 
mashed  nasty  cut-worms  with  his  fingers,  poisoned  squirrels  and  frightened 
crows  awaj',  has  run  through  the  rows  with  a  cultivator  and  laid  the  crop  by 
in  July,  with  the  temperature  at  100^  and  the  leaves  sawing  across  his  sweaty 
neck,  who  went  out  in  the  chill  and  stormy  nights  of  early  September  and  fig- 
ured up  the  interest  on  his  mortgage  while  he  figured  on  the  chances  of  frost 
that  would  destroy  the  season's  work — that  is  the  man  who  will  live  forever 
when  he  is  transplanted  to  the  Sacramento  or  San  Joaquin  valley,  with  water  to 
irrigate  his  land.  He  will  prune  his  trees  and  vines,  pick  his  fruits  and  dry 
his  raisins,  and  make  more  clear  money  off  twenty  acres  than  he  ever  did  off 
a  quarter  section  in  the  Sucker  State." 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  Alia  will  be  able  to  cram  its  good  ideas  in  this 
direction  into  the  heads  of  the  San  Francisco  business  public,  so  that  they 


214 


may  aid,  this  year  and  in  future,  in  driving  the  California  Legislature  into 
passing  laws  on  the  subject  of  irrigation  which  will  enable  districts  to  con- 
struct canals,regulate  the  flow  and  distribution  of  water,  aud  stop  the  ever- 
lasting lawsuits  of  the  so-called  riparian  claimants. 


San  Francisco  Daily  Examiner. 

Irrigfalion  and  tlie  Common  La'W. 

The  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  was  the  outgrowth  of  peculiar 
conditions.  It  is  not  a  universal  doctrine.  It  was  fitted  to  circumstances, 
just  as  irrigation  is  applied  to  conditions  the  reverse  of  those  which  sanc- 
tioned the  riparian  doctrine. 

The  common  law  of  England  is  the  creature  of  custom.  Custom  made  the 
law.  It  arose  from  long-established  usages.  In  the  early  daj^s  of  British 
civilization  the  streams  were  used  for  navigation,  to  turn  mills  and  for  fish- 
ing. The  conditions  of  the  climate  rendered,  irrigation  an  unknown  factor  in 
agriculture.  Water  was  diverted  from  the  streams  only  for  domestic  and 
mechanical  uses,  and  in  the  latter  contingency,  statute,  supplementing  the 
law  of  custom,  required  its  return  to  the  original  channel  after  fulfilling  the 
mechanical  functions  for  which  it  was  diverted.  But  the  fact,  that  under  any 
circumstances  it  could  be  taken  from  the  stream,  shows  that  the  common 
law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  even  in  England,  was  not  inflexible  and  ab- 
solute. 

The  smaller  streams  were  useful  only,  as  we  have  said,  as  repositories  for 
fish,  to  turn  mills  located  on  their  banks  and  to  supply  cattle  in  the  field 
with  drink.  When  diverted  to  supply  fountains  or  to  turn  inland  machinery, 
a  general  statute,  in  the  reign  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  directed  its  return  by 
an  artificial  channel  to  its  native  stream,  •*  so  that  the  volume  shall  not  be 
diminished,  except  in  so  far  as  it  is  lost  by  unavoidable  means."  This  statute 
in  itself  demonstrates  that  the  rule  of  the  common  law,  which  conQned  water 
to  its  original  channel,  was  not  inflexible.  On  the  contrary,  as  the  law  was 
the  outgjowth  of  custom,  so  custom  modified  its  provisions  and  diversified 
the  uses  to  which  water  might  be  applied.  The  common  law  being  the  out- 
growth of  custom,  and  custom  being  the  creature  of  usage,  the  doctrine  of 
riparian  rights  was  established  simply  in  the  absence  of  antagonistic  interests. 
Had  there  been  a  statute  it  would  have  usurped  the  domain  of  custom  and 
the  uses  of  water  would  have  been  defined  upon  a  basis  that  would  have  ex- 
cluded the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights. 

It  must  be  also  understood  that  the  common  law  is  a  collection  of  customs 
in  so  far  only  as  the  customs  can  be  established  and  proved  to  exist.  The 
riparian  interest  is  an  established  custom  in  England,  and  so  becomes  a  part 
of  the  common  law  of  that  country.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  a  directly 
contrary  custom  would  not  be  equally  sound  as  a  common-law  right  if  found- 
ed on  established  usage— the  diversion  of  water,  for  example,  for  a  particular 
purpose.    In  fact,  the  legitimate  application  of  the  common-law  doctrine  of 


215 


custom  would  make  priority  of  right  by  priority  of  appropriation  of  water 
for  specific  uses,  such  as  the  irrigation  of  land,  an  absolute  right  under  the 
common  law.  Riparian  rights  are  simply  customs.  They  were  the  usages 
of  the  country.  They  are  therefore  recognized  by  the  common  law,  not  be- 
cause of  any  intrinsic  merit  in  the  doctrine,  but  solely  for  the  reason  that 
they  were  a  recognized  custom.  If,  then,  it  be  the  custom  and  not  the  prin- 
ciple that  gives  vitality  to  the  doctrine,  the  custom  of  using  water  from  the 
streams  for  irrigating  purposes,  as  in  California,  overturns  the  absolete  ripa- 
rian claim  and  invests  with  the  common-law  sanction  the  custom  made  law- 
ful by  priority  of  appropriation. 

The  fault  in  our  courts  has  been  this:  They  have  mistaken  the  spirit  of  the 
common  law.  There  are  no  recoguized  principles  in  common  law.  It  is 
made  up  of  customs.  Use  is  custom.  Therefore,  when  the  farmers  of  Cali- 
fornia diverted  water  from  the  streams  for  artificial  irrigation,  and  no  effect- 
ual opposition  was  made  to  it,  it  became  a  custom  and  part  of  the  common  law. 
Custom  must  precede  the  law  of  recognition.  With  the  growth  of  the  cus- 
tom of  diversion  for  irrigation  purposes  the  riparian  doctrine  became  obso- 
lete as  effectually  as  if  this  use  had  been  proclaimed  by  statute. 

Irrigation,  then,  is  a  custom  established  in  California,  and  by  all  legiti- 
mate rules  of  legal  interpretation  is  a  part  of  the  common  law  of  the  laud. 
Because  the  Courts  have  refused  to  recognize  it,  it  becomes  necessary  for  the 
Legislature  to  pass  upon  it — not  to  create  a  new  right,  but  to  confirm  an  old 
one. 


Stockton  Evening  Mail. 

Let  Us  Irrigate, 

The  San  Francisco  Alia  has  performed  a  valuable  service  to  the  whole 
State  by  taking  the  lead  in  the  advocacy  of  irrigation,  and  maintaining  the 
position  with  its  accustomed  vigor. 

This  should  be  considered  the  question  of  all  questions  affecting  the  vital 
interests  of  California,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  the  expulsion  of  the  Chi- 
nese. Our  State  is  not  at  present,  take  it  all  in  all,  developed  up  to  more 
than  one-quarter  of  its  possible  productiveness.  Nothing  would  develop  it 
80  rapidly,  so  completely  and  so  permanently  as  irrigation.  It  is  sufficient 
for  present  purposes  to  consider  only  the  region  contiguous  to  Stockton. 
Stockton  ought  to  have  a  population  equal  in  numbers  to  the  present  popu- 
lation of  the  city  and  county,  and  the  county  outside  of  the  city  should  be 
sustaining  to-day  in  active  agricultural,  viticultural  and  horticultural  indus- 
tries fully  thirty  thousand  people,  instead  of  its  present  fifteen  thousand,  or 
less.  Nobody  questions  the  ultimate  possibilities  [of  soil  and  climate.  Old 
citizens  and  recent  acquisitions,  pioneers  and  tenderfeet,  are  all  agreed  that 
this  will  be  a  region  of  great  productiveness  some  day. 

The  only  question  then  is,  how  and  when  ia  the  change  to  be  brought  about. 
As  to  the  how,  it  is  plain  that  the  only  thing  needful  to  make  this  portion  of 


216 


the  valley  blossom  like  a  rose  the  year  round  is  water.  Water,  water,  every- 
where, nor  auy  drop  for  the  famishing  vegetable  life  seen  everywhere  during 
the  summer  months,  is  what  impresses  a]l  first  observers.  The  rivers  all  run 
wastefully  to  the  sea,  while  the  plains  onto  which  they  might  easily  be  divert- 
ed  are  parched  and  forbidding. 

There  are  three  sources  from  which  this  portion  of  the  valley  might  be 
abundantly  watered  during  the  entire  dry  season.  One  is  the  Stanislaus 
river,  on  the  south,  another  is  the  Mokelumne,  on  the  north,  and  the  third  is 
the  Salt  Spring  valley  reservoir,  between  the  two.  It  has  been  estimated  that 
for  $150,000  the  Stanislaus  river  could  be  made  to  irrigate  30,000  acres  of 
land.  The  increase  in  the  value  of  the  land  resulting  from  irrigation  would 
more  than  double  the  cost  of  the  canal  aud  lateral  ditches.  This  will  be 
done  some  day,  and  the  Mokelumne  will  also  be  made  to  serve  the  farmer  and 
the  orchardist.  What  a  change  will  be  on  the  face  of  nature  hereabout  then. 
This  county  can  produce  anything  that  is  grown  in  the  State,  if  only  the 
plants  and  trees  are  watered. 

Why  then  let  the  rivers  mock  the  plains  aud  the  soil  withhold  its  most 
precious  bounties?  The  old  riparian  law  might  have  been  good  enough  for 
England,  but  it  is  no  more  applicable  to  California  than  a  law  would  be  for- 
bidding the  navigation  of  our  rivers  by  any  sort  of  cra^fc  but  those  propelled 
by  sail. 


Daily  Alta  California. 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention  met  yesterday 
at  Fresno,  and  promulgated  an  address  which  will  be  found  elsewhere  in  our 
columns.  It  is  a  narrative  of  things  past  and  a  noble  prophesy  of  things  to 
come.  In  its  antitheses  may  be  read  the  certain  future  of  California.  If  our 
laws  are  brought  into  harmony  with  our  physical  conditions  and  natural 
necessities,  this  State  at  once  opens  her  acres  to  the  densest  and  most  pros- 
perous population  in  the  world.  If  our  laws  remain  at  right  angles  to  those 
conditions  and  necessities,  the  desert  now  untouched  remains  bald  aud  bar- 
ren, and  invades  the  green  oases  which  are  now  supporting  a  prosperous 
people. 

California  is  more  talked  and  thought  about  in  the  East  now  than  when  she 
shot  into  notice  and  notoriety  upon  the  discovery  of  gold,  for  there  are  more 
people  to  talk  and  think. 

A  land  that  produces  the  orange,  grape,  olive,  almond  and  fig,  appeals  now 
as  powerfully  to  the  fancy  as  did  the  production  of  gold  thirty  years  ago. 
The  agricultural  and  horticultural  possibilities  of  a  winterless  country,  where 
the  palm  waves  its  branches  and  the  magnolia  blooms  the  year  through,  lure 
and  allure  and  conjure  with  greater  power  than  the  promise  of  gold  to  be  dug 
from  the  hills.  It  opens  up  the  prospect  of  a  redistribution  of  population. 
It  promises  a  useful  drain  for  the  benefit  of  the  older  States,  that  leaves  with- 
in them  better  opportunities  for  all  who  stay,  while  there  is  no  rale  by  which.. 


217 


to  measnre  the  certainties  offered  to  all  who  come  blessed  with  a  willing  spirit 
and  ready  for  the  light  toil  which  wins  a  competency. 

Now  is  Califoruia's  more  than  oolden  moment.  It  is  not  worth  while  tO' 
dally  over  details.  Let  the  work  outlined  by  this  committee  go  forward  to 
success,  and  the  processes  for  utilizing  water  and  Storing  it  lor  irrigation  wiU' 
unfold  and  keep  pace  with  our  necessities. 

Bleak  New  England  impoauds  the  flood  water  of  her  rivers  to  make  power 
for  the  mills.  Ou  the  heads  of  the  Mississippi  the  same  process  stores  the 
spring  floods,  to  be  released  from  dams  in  the  dry  summer  to  make  the  stream 
navigable.  In  its  first  stage  the  ordinary  flow  of  our  rivers  will  be  tapped  for 
irrigation,  and  f  s  we  get  ou  the  caiions  will  be  dammed,  and  finally  every 
pearly  drop  of  water  in  our  State  will  be  transmuted  into  grain  or  grass,  it 
•will  sparkle  in  the  wine  bottle,  it  will  tempt  the  palate  in  the  juices  of  fruits, 
it  will  shine  in  the  nutty-fl.ivored  oil.  Transfiguring  the  desert,  this  water 
will  smile  in  the  tints  of  the  rose  and  in  the  verdure  of  the  palm. 

One  wonders  that  we  have  dela3'ed  so  long  in  making  this  a  foremost  issue 
and  crowding  it  to  a  settlement.  Southern  California  has  shown  what  can 
be  done,  the  crops  that  can  be  raised,  the  colonies  that  can  settled  by  irriga- 
tion. Spain  long  awo  taught  the  world  the  value  of  irrigated  lands.  There 
those  lands  sell  at  $600  to  $1,000  per  acre,  and  irrigated  lands  rent  annually 
for  a  sum  per  acre  equal  to  the  selling  price  of  lauds  that  are  without  water.. 
There  is  nothing  that  those  Spanish  lands  produce  that  cannot  be  grown  in 
equal  excellence  here.  It  was  instinct  that  led  the  Spanish  race  to  settle 
along  this  Coast.  Here,  as  at  home,  they  began  with  flocks  and  herds,  and 
we  succeed  them  to  take  the  next  step  and  force  the  soil  to  its  noblest  pro- 
duction. 

The  committee's  address  draws  a  faithful  picture  for  the  benefit  of  San: 
Francisco.  It  points  out  to  the  business  men  of  this  city  the  way  to  a  future 
that  must  command  their  interested  sympathy.  We  have  enough  city  popu- 
lation now  and  to  spare.  We  want  rural  recruits.  We  want  the  local  back- 
ing of  five  or  six  millions  of  people,  and  the  coming  five  or  six  years  can 
bring  them,  if  we  offer  tho  rural  certainties  that  lie  in  irrigation.  Look  at 
Dakota,  Nebraska,  Iowa,  jumping  forward  iu  population  at  the  rate  of  100  to 
400  per  cent,  every  decade!  Yet  the  hospitality  they  offer  is  as  the  hand- 
shake of  a  cold-blooded  frog  to  the  hot-palmed  grdsp,of  two  lovers,  compared 
to  what  California  can  afford  as  an  attraction  to  immigrants  and  an  induce- 
ment of  their  stay. 

We  need  not  necessarily  rake  Europe  to  find  population.  Our  American 
people  have  shown  in  Southern  California  a  remarkable  adaptation  to  the 
conditions  of  profitable  ownership  and  pleasant  life  on  these  irrigated  lands. 
If  there  is  any  situation  to  which  an  American  is  unsuited  it  must  be  in  the 
next  world,  for  it  is  yet  undiscovered  in  this.  We  like  to  see  them  come  and 
get  the  benefit  of  ownership  in  the  choice  and  Eden-like  spots  in  their  own 
country. 

The  committee  puts  upon  this  city  the  compulsion  of  considering  this 
question  now  and  taking  her  part  in  its  solution.    The  convention  meets 


218 


here.  It  will  not  only  deliberate  in  the  presence  of  our  people,  but  they  will 
be  expected  to  be  something  more  than  idle  anditors.  Our  merchants  and 
bankers  and  manufacturers  will  be  called  to  council  with  the  country  folk. 
They  will  be  asked  to  affirm  their  faith  in  irrigation  by  their  works,  and  if 
they  have  no  faith  they  must  stand  up  and  tell  why  they  have  not.  The  best 
thing  in  this  movement  is  its  conjunction  of  city  and  State  interests.  This 
campaign  is  to  be  a  severe  case  of  confluent  enthusiasm.  It  is  an  issue  which 
elevates  politics  and  brings  into  the  primary  movements  of  parties  the  best 
class  of  people.  Readers  of  Bret  Harte's  **  Luck  of  Roaring  Camp  "  remem- 
ber how  from  the  cradle  of  the  motherless  baby  went  out  a  softening  influ- 
ence that  refined  even  the  speech  of  the  roughest  men.  So  this  question  of 
useful  appropriation  of  the  waters  will  refine  our  politics,  for  in  it  is  all  that 
relates  to  hearthstone  and  roof  tree,  to  the  founding  of  homes  and  the 
strengthening  of  every  institution  of  civilization. 

When  the  convention  comes  let  it  be  welcomed  by  our  commercial  and 
financial  bodies,  and  let  its  best  purposes  be  strengthened  by  the  active  sym- 
pathy of  every  man  who  has  a  conception  of  the  laws  by  which  common- 
wealths grow.  When  it  declares  its  plans  let  them  be  the  legend  upon  the 
banners  of  parties,  for  in  that  sign  we  are  to  conquer  the  glorious  future  of 
7  the  greatest  of  all  the  States. 

Oakland  Evening  Tribnne. 

Irrigation  to  the  Front. 

The  address  of  the  State  Irrigation  Committee,  published  in  another  col- 
umn, is  food  for  political  digestion.  There  is  no  announcement  of  the  form- 
ation of  an  independent  political  party,  but  there  is  an  intensity  of  purpose 
pervading  the  address  foreshadowing  a  distinct  political  organization  in  the 
not  distant  future. 

Republican  party  leaders  had  best  give  the  subject  serious  consideration. 
Here  is  an  organized  movement  of  a  whole  community  to  be  met  in  the  field 
of  politics.  Will  the  Republican  party  give  it  the  cold  shoulder,  or  will  it 
take  up  the  cause  of  irrigation,  and  gain  the  gratitude  and  the  votes  of  the 
irrigators?  The  Committee  says:  "We  must  now  make  our  force  effective  in 
the  politics  of  the  State,  since  in  politics  the  Legislature  to  which  we  appeal 
is  generated.  We  must  demonstrate  the  fact  that  there  are  political  triumphs 
: greater  than  the  conquest  of  spoils,  and  this  is  to  be  done  by  going  unitedly 
into  politics  to  stay  until  our  rights  are  secured." 

The  Republican  party  has  ever  been  the  friend  of  progress.  Under  the 
wise  and  beneficent  policy  of  the  party  for  twenty-four  years  the  internal  im- 
provement of  the  country  by  the  settlement  of  the  public  lands  has  been  with- 
out pamllel  in  the  history  of  nations.  As  a  part  of  this  policy  a  Republican 
Congress  passed  the  Act  of  1866,  which  the  National  Supreme  Court  has  held 
to  be  recognition  of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  of  water,  setting  the  seal  of 
disapproval  upon  the  uncongenial  and  inapplicable  riparian  theory,  in  the 


219 

Pacific  States  and  Territories.  This  policy  has  reared  civilization  in  a  desert 
waste  of  country.  All  the  irrigators  ask  is  that  this  policy  of  the  past  be 
written  into  the  ineffaceable  law  of  the  land. 

The  Republican  party  cannot  hesitate  to  perpetuate  the  system  of  develop- 
ment framed  and  perfected  by  the  statesmen  whose  glory  was  born  of  the 
troublous  times  of  civil  strife  and  whose  names  live  in  every  heart. 
>  The  party  cannot  afford  to  repudiate  the  right  of  appropriation  and  take 
back  what  was  ireely  aud  generously  given  as  the  reward  of  energy,  enter- 
prise and  industry. 


Colusa  Sun. 

The  Irrigration  Bills. 

A  correspondent,  who  is,  by  the  way,  a  friend  of  irrigation  measures,  in- 
forms us  that  some  of  the  friends  of  some  of  the  members  of  the  last  State 
Legislature,  who  saw  fit  to  oppose  all  for  the  furthering  of  irrigation  projects 
in  the  State,  are  asserting  that  the  Fresno  Committee's  bills  proposed  to  take 
all  the  water  away  from  the  man  at  the  mouth,  or  lower  end  of  a  stream, 
without  compensation;  that  it  proposed  to  make  arbitrary  districts,  and  tax 
all  land  within  the  boundary,  whether  it  could  be  irrigated  or  not.  There 
were  other  stated  misrepresentations  to  the  bills  proposed,  but  these  are  the 
chief,  and  afford  us  an  opportunity  of  explaining  the  scope  of  the  "District" 
bill,  the  most  important  bill  presented,  and  about  the  only  one  in  which  the 
people  of  the  Sacramento  Valley  are  interested. 

To  form  a  district,  a  certain  number  of  land  owners  must  petition  the  Board 
of  Supervisors  of  the  county  in  which  the  largest  amount  of  land  is  situated, 
setting  out  boundaries,  etc.  The  Board  must  then  fix  a  day  for  the  hearing, 
and  give  proper  notice.  At  the  date  of  hearing,  the  Board  is  authorized  to 
take  testimony,  and  to  include  land  on  the  outside  that  may  be  irrigated  by 
the  proposed  work,  or  leave  out  all  land  that  is  shown  cannot  be  irrigated, 
although  the  same  might  be  in  the  center  of  a  district.  Towns  are  thus  left 
out.  After  the  district  has  thus  been  formed,  it  requires  the  written  consent 
of  iwo-ihirds  of  the  land  owners,  owning  two-thirds  of  the  land,  to  confirm  the 
district.  It  will  be  seen  that  this  arrangement  protects  the  small  owners 
against  the  large  ones,  and  the  large  ones  against  small  ones.  After  the  dis- 
trict has  been  formed,  and  Trustees  elected  by  the  people,  it  can  go  on  with 
ordinary  work,  but  if  it  shall  become  necessary  to  go  in  debt  and  issue  bonds^ 
it  must  again  have  the  consent  of  the  two-thirds,  as  above  set  out. 

The  bill  proposed  to  condemn  and  pay  for  everything  that  stood  in  the 
way  of  the  accomplishment  of  these  ends.  If  every  man  on  a  stream  below  a 
proposed  canal  had  a  right  to  fix  the  price  of  his  own  damage,  or  to  refuse  to 
allow  any  water  taken  out,  according  to  his  whim,  it  is  very  evident  that 
there  would  never  be  any  irrigation. 

The  gentlemen,  who,  at  the  dictation  of  a  few  cattle  kings,  threw  themselves 
across  the  path  of  California's  progress,  shall  never  escape  the  responsibility 
of  that  act  while  we  have  the  power  to  draw  pen  across  paper.    It  is  not  a 


220 


question  of  a  difference  of  opinion.  The  men  who  acted  in  the  Sr nite  as  the 
attorneys  for  those  who  would  rather  see  thousands  of  square  miles  of  Cali- 
fornia's most  fertile  lands — with  water — a  vast  cattle  ranch,  feeding  one  cow 
to  forty  acre.",  than  see  it  covered  with  vineyards  and  orange  groves  and 
orchards  and  grass  plots,  supporting  and  making  rich  and  happy  a  family  on 
each  forty  acres,  admitted  that  it  was  a  great  question,  admitted  that  legisla- 
tion was  necessary,  but  they  stubbornly  fought  against  time  to  keep  the  bills* 
from  reaching  a  position  where  they  could  be  even  amended.  Thay  fought 
not  like  Senator?,  but  like  attorneys;  they  fought  to  keep  the  bills  from  being 
considered.  It  is  no  part  of  a  Senator's  duty  to  stammer  and  repeat^,  and  read 
long  extracts,  and  look  back  ut  the  clock,  and  remark  how  slowly  it  moves,  in 
order  to  keep  a  measure,  he  admits  to  be  of  vital  interest  to  the  State,  from 
being  considered. 

We  are  willing  to  stand  by  those  Fresno  bills,  and  believe  we  can  defend 
them  against  all  the  world,  especially  in  the  District  bill,  which  is  of  more 
direct  interest  to  this  section  of  the  S'ate,  and  we  shall  be  pleased  to  explain 
to  any  one  the  provisions  of  the  bill5\  We  mast  put  this  country  in  a  condi- 
tion where  wo  will  not  be  dependent  on  a  single  crop.  We  must  fix  it  so  that 
it  can  be  depended  upon  for  a  crop  each  year  of  cereals,  of  grass,  of  fruit,  or 
anything  the  farmer  may  think  at  the  time  will  be  profitable. 


Stockton  Daily  Independent. 

The  Irrigcators. 

In  Fresno,  on  Monday,  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation 
Convention  signed  an  aidress  to  the  people  in  behalf  of  the  movement  they 
represent.  The  address  recites  that  the  committee  framed  bills  to  be  acted 
on  by  the  last  legisl  iture,  and  intended  to  place  irrigation  among  the  perma- 
nent policies  of  the  S:ate. 

The  irrigationists  received  vigorous  support  from  many  newspapers,  and 
-worked  hard  to  obtain  the  aid  of  legislators. 

The  few  riparian  owners  who  oppose  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation,  con- 
trolling a  small  minority  in  the  house,  filibustered  to  hinder  there  the  pass- 
age of  our  bills. 

The  committee  advises  properly  that  the  votes  of  irrigators  be  withheld 
from  these  filibusters  when  they  appear  again  as  candidates  for  office,  advice 
which,  if  followed,  will  result  disastrously  to  the  ambitions  of  this  county's 
Democratic  represntatives  in  the  last  senate.  Attention  is  called  to  instruct- 
ive figures  showing  the  comparative  settlement  of  Eastern  and  California 
Talleys.  Although  thousands  of  acres  of  desert  lauds  have  been  reclaimed 
and  made  to  yield  an  export  product,  the  total  acreage  so  redeemed  is  insig- 
nificant beside  that  remaining  in  its  virgin  poverty. 

With  the  same  density  of  population  as  the  basin  of  the  St.  Lawrence  the 
Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys  would  contain  1,85G,000  souls;  and  in- 
creasing until  the  valley  of  the  Delaware  rate  were  reached,   the  population 


221 


-would  be  10,208,000,  or  near  ten  millions  more  people  than  are  here  now. 
That  such  a  number  of  people  sball  be  brought  iuto  these  two  magnificent 
valleys;  that  their  energies  shall  be  given  to  cultivation  of  the  soil,  home 
l)uildiug  aud  trade  baildjug;  that  they  shall  invest  in  the  vaUeys  ten  times  as 
many  millions  of  dollars  as  their  own  numbers  aggregate,  contributing  their 
purchasing  wealth  to  Stockton  and  other  cities  located  convenienlly  where 
nature  has  afforded  superior  facilities  for  manufacture  and  commerce,  and 
adding  to  the  State's  single  metropolis  of  San  Francisco  half  a  dozen  interior 
cities  of  metropolitan  importance;  that  (his  shall  come  about  with  the  time 
of  one  man's  life,  may  seem  a  wild  dream,  but  it  is  no  less  possible  than  the 
building  of  San  Francisco  in  as  little  time,  or  the  greater  advancement,  dur- 
ing an  equal  period,  of  the  great  cities  and  some  of  the  valleys  of  the  E.ist. 
But  it  cannot  be  done  without  irrigation. 

Only  with  irrigation  can  crops  be  raised  on  much  of  this  bare  land  in  the 
valley  areas,  because  ot  the  dry  atmosphere  and  light  and  fickle  rainfalls,  but 
with  irrigation  the  desert  "  may  be  made  to  blossom  like  a  rose." 

Since  the  last  session  of  the  Legislature  the  irrigators  have  gained  strength. 
There  has  grown  in  their  favor  an  intelligent  and  firmly  established  sentiment 
that  the  bounty  of  nature  should  be  used  in  the  two  great  valleys  of  this  great 
State  to  bring  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,  and  that,  though  the 
law  may  now  protect  riparian  ownership  and  the  barrenness  of  the  desert,  it 
should  be  made  to  declare  for  an  irrigation  policy,  enabling  the  cultivation 
on  this  now  arid  soil,  of  the  generous  crops  water  will  assure,  and  the  dis- 
placement of  desert  dreariness  by  the  cheerfulness  and  prosperity  of  an  in- 
dustrious and  a  loyal  people  who  shall  be  to  the  State  an  additional  element 
of  wealth  and  strength. 

The  further  settlement  aud  development  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley  must 
repound  to  the  commercial  growth  of  Stockton,  and  irrigation  measures  for 
San  Joaquin  county  itself  could  be  pursued  to  decided  advantage. 


Sacramento  Record-Union. 

The  vast  importance  of  the  irrigation  question  in  California  can  scarcely 
be  over-estimated  It  is  taking  form  now  for  new  presentation  to  the  next 
Legislature,  when  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  it  will  receive  more  careful,  dispas- 
sionate and  statesman-like  consideration  than  it  met  with  in  1884.  It  ought 
not  be  entangled  with  slickens,  politics,  ambition  and  strife  for  place.  It 
must,  if  well  considered  and  justly  determined,  be  adjudged  upon  its  own 
merits  and  tree  from  any  other  influences.  We  have  already  expressed  our 
opinion  as  to  the  duty  of  the  State.  It  has  duties  in  the  premises,  and, 
aside  from  the  determination  of  the  issues  between  riparianists  and  aporop- 
riators,  the  least  of  these  is  to  provide  a  storage  system  for  the  surplus  waters 
of  winter,  and  the  retention  for  use  of  the  melting  snows  of  the  higher  alti- 
tudes. 


222 


Kern  County  Gazette- 

The  advent  of  another  political  campaign,  involving  issues  segregated  from 
questions  of  national  interest,  brings  into  prominence  matters  concerning  the 
State  as  a  distinct  community.  We  have  already  had  occasion  to  advert  to  the 
surpassing  importance  of  the  irrigation  problem.  Neither  business  men  nor 
politicians  can  afford  to  ignore  it.  The  water  question  is  forcing  itself  to  the 
topmost  of  all  questions  of  the  day.  We  have  loug  since  endeavored  to  make 
it  evident  to  business  men  that  we  must  populate  and  develop  the  interior  if 
we  would  create  a  wealthy  commercial  centre  here.  The  southern  half  of  the 
State,  composed  largely  of  desert  lands,  is  bsing  rapidly  settled  and  improved 
by  increasing  irrigation.  The  existing  controversy  as  to  whether  the  riparian 
law  or  the  law  of  appropriation  is  to  be  the  law  of  the  land  involves  either  the 
discontinuance  or  perpetuation  of  irrigation.  That  the  law  of  appropriation 
ought  to  have  been  adopted  originally  both  lor  mining  and  agricultural  pur- 
poses, no  intelligent  person  will  question.  Whether  it  was  adopted,  is  for 
the  Court  to  decide.  Whether  it  will  be  the  law  of  the  future  will  be  for  the 
people  to  decide.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  intention  of  our  first  law 
makers,  and  whatever  may  have  been  in  the  minds  of  our  earlier  judges,  as  to 
the  operation  of  the  common  law  upon  our  water  system,  it  is,  nevertheless, 
true  that  not  only  farmers,  but  lawyers,  and  even  eminent  judges,  have  from 
the  very  earliest  time,  believed  that  the  first  in  time  was  in  right,  and  that 
the  ownership  of  the  bank  gave  no  right  to  water,  without  actual  appropria- 
tion and  use.  Acting  upon  this  belief,  whether  right  or  wrong,  thousands 
and  tens  of  thousands  have  settled  in  the  State,  and  are  to-day  depending  for 
food,  shelter  and  raiment  upon  water  rights  supposed  to  have  been  acquired 
by  appropriation.  This  state  of  affairs  has  grown  out  of  the  irresistible  ne- 
cessities of  the  people,  and  the  condition  of  the  country.  Not  a  yard  of  ditch 
would  ever  have  been  constructed,  not  of  drop  of  water  would  ever  have  been 
diverted  if  it  could  have  been  avoided.  With  the  growth  of  population, 
the  necessity  grows.  Each  day  adds  to  its  force.  To  the  necessities  of 
a  whole  people  everything  must  yield.  A  nation  has  never  existed  which 
has  not  by  revolution,  either  peaceful  or  otherwise,  destroyed  whatever 
impediments  to  its  necessary  growth  may  have  crept  into  its  body  of  law. 
In  this  country  of  popular  elections  the  peaceful  methods  of  righting  public 
wrongs  are  through  the  legislatures  and  the  courts.  With  a  judiciary  nearly 
evenly  divided  as  to  laws  of  water  rights,  each  side  pursuing  a  separate 
process  of  reasoning  in  arriving  at  its  conclusion,  who  shall  say  which  is 
right  and  which  is  wrong,  so  far  as  pure  logic  or  technical  construction  is  con- 
cerned. Without  invading  the  sacredness  of  the  judicial  conscience,  now 
advancing  the  control  of  the  judicial  mind  by  popular  clamor,  we  venture  to 
precfict  that  the  aggregated  voice  of  the  people,  driven  to  unanimity  by  the 
necessities  oi  the  situation,  will  eventually  determine  this  grave  question. 
No  judge  is  to  be  censured  or  questioned  for  a  decision  rendered  according 
to  the  lights  of  his  own  intellect.  No  candidate  for  judicial  office  is  to  be 
pledged  to  any  policy  or  upon  any  legal   question.     But  this  much  is  to  h& 


223 


gathered  from  judicial  history.  When  the  two  great  political  parties  of  the 
country  were  divided  upon  great  questions,  involving  opposite  constructions 
of  the  Federal  Constitution,  the  great  popular  majority  through  its  chosen 
appointing  power,  selected  the  Supreme  Justices  of  the  United  States,  from 
among  those  distinguished  jurists  who  held  well  known  views  upon  consti- 
tntional  policy  and  construction,  in  harmony  with  the  popular  demand. 

We  think,  without  violating  the  del'cacy  due  to  candidates  for  judicial 
office,  that  we  may  not  only  go  to  the  polls  and  vote  for  Judges  who  are  well 
known  to  coincide  with  our  views  upon  thj  laws  of  appropriation,  but  we 
may  urge  an(J  influence  others  to  do  likewise.  It  is  inevitable  that  the  will 
of  the  people  expressed  through  the  ballot  box  will  sooner  or  latter  determine 
the  question.    There  is  no  time  like  the  present. 


Kern  County  Gazette. 

Tiie  Hilon.tgom.evy  Grant. 

Nearly  thirty  years  ago  a  scheme  was  put  through  the  Legislature,  which, 
npon  its  face,  promised  to  be  a  great  public  improvement,  calculated  to 
reclaim  and  improve  an  immense  body  of  land  in  the  lower  San  Joaquin 
valley  at  private  expense.  It  was  supposed  at  that  time  that  the  swamp  and 
overflowed  lands  in  Fresno,  Tulare  and  Kern,  extending  from  Bakersfield 
into  Fresno  county,  were  almost  the  only  available  agricultural  lands  in  that 
section  of  the  State.  A  glance  at  the  map  of  the  State  will  show  the  immense 
tract  of  land  affected  by  an  act  passed  in  1857,  the  State  granting  to  private  in- 
dividuals the  odd  sections  of  all  the  swamp  lands  in  Tulare  valley,  conditioned 
upon  their  reclaiming  the  entire  body  of  swamp  lands.  The  act  provided 
for  the  construction  of  canals  of  sufficient  width  and  depth  to  afford  a  con- 
venient passage  for  boats  of  eighty  tons  burden.  It  also  required  that  the 
lands  should  be  so  drained  and  leveed  as  to  make  them  susceptible  of  culti- 
vation. Failure  to  comply  with  these  conditions  was  to  work  a  forfeiture  of 
the  grant.  The  grantees  of  the  State  were  not  to  have  any  of  these  lands 
until  they  had  completely  reclaimed  all  of  the  land  and  constructed  a  navigable 
canal,  extending  from  Kern  river  to  the  San  Joaquin  river.  In  1862  the 
grantees  obtained  the  passage  of  a  supplementary  act,  which  gave  them  more 
favorable  conditions  by  dividing  the  lands  to  be  reclaimed  into  three  districts, 
upon  the  reclamation  of  either  of  which  the  title  to  odd  sections  thereon 
should  vest  in  the  grantees.  The  act  also  extended  other  favorable  conditions 
to  the  grantees,  not  contained  in  the  original  act,  but  the  leading  conditions 
being  those  which  were  stated  to  be  the  consideration,  for  the  grant  still 
remained  the  same — namely,  the  reclamation  of  the  lands,  by  so  draining 
and  leveeing  as  to  make  them  susceptible  of  cultivation;  and  the  construction 
of  navigable  canals  of  sufficient  width  and  depth  to  afford  passage  for  boats 
of  eighty  tons  burden. 

Ten  years  passed.  The  ship  canal  remained,  as  it  still  remains,  a  creature 
of  the  imagination,  existing  not  even  on  paper.  The  entire  body  of  laud 
15 


224 


was  still  an  unclaimed  wilderness  of  bog,  water  and  tules.  No  attempt  ha^ 
been  made  at  reclamation.  The  supplementary  act  of  1862  had  provided 
that  the  Governor  and  Surveyor-General  should  approve  and  certify  to  the 
reclamation  before  any  title  should  vest  in  the  grantees.  In  order  to  obtain 
this  certificate  a  dam  was  commenced,  designed  to  tempararily  hold  back  the 
waters  of  Kern  river  until  a  report  could  be  secured,  establishing  the  fact  of 
reclamation.  Even  this  subterfuge  was  a  failure.  The  dam  would  not  hold 
the  water.  After  waiting  vainly  for  a  month  or  two  for  the  grantees  to  secure 
a  temporary  stoppage  of  the  overflow,  the  person  appointed  to  examine  the 
law  and  ascertain  whether  or  not  the  law  had  been  complied  with,  was 
induced  to  make  a  dishonest  report.  This,  combined  with  other  influences, 
more  readily  imagined  than  defined,  procured  the  issuance  in  1867  of  a  patent 
for  ninety  thousand  acres  of  land  to  the  grantees.  Not  feeling  secure  in  the 
fruits  of  their  fraud  in  1873,  the  grantees  secured  the  passage  of  an  act  reliev- 
ing them  from  the  construction  of  the  navigable  canals,  but  were  unable  to 
avoid  the  insertion  of  a  proviso  requiring  them  to  reclaim  the  land,  and 
making  such  reclamation  the  distinct  and  only  consideration  for  the  grant. 

In  1878  the  patent  thus  issued  corruptly  and  fraudulently  was  set  aside  and 
declared  void  by  decree  of  the  District  Court,  and  after  years  in  the  Supreme 
Court  the  decree  of  the  lower  court  has  been  finally  approved.  In  the  mean- 
while the  grantees  in  1878  resorted  to  the  Legislature.  They  obtained  the 
adoption  of  a  law  giving  them  the  lands  described  in  the  fraudulent  patent 
upon  proof  that  they  had  expended  one  dollar  per  acre,  instead  of  requiring 
as  originally  contemplated,  ship  canals  and  complete  and  permanent  recla- 
mation. Even  here  the  usual  propensity  of  the  grantees,  to  get  something 
for  nothing,  again  crops  out,  in  the  provision  that  the  one  dollar  per  aere 
expended  should  include  State  and  county  taxes.  After  the  passage  of  this 
Act  the  grand  finale  in  this  drama  of  thirty  years'  duration  takes  place,  when 
the  State  is  defrauded  of  nearly  a  hundred  thousand  acres  of  land,  by  proofs 
under  the  Act  of  1878.  But  what  is  the  epilogue?  Why,  instead  of  becom- 
ing the  owners  of  a  body  of  reclaimed  land  susceptible  of  cultivation,  and 
threaded  with  navigable  canals  they  suddenly  became  riparian  owners.  They 
attempted  to  transform  the  gift  of  the  State  into  a  weapon  of  destruction. 
Not  only  in  Kern  county,  but  in  Tulare,  and  in  Fresno,  irrigation  and  recla- 
mation go  hand  in  hand.  The  irrigation  of  the  desert  reclaims  the  swamp 
and  renders  it  fit  for  cultivation.  But  those  grants  of  the  State  are  indepen- 
dent of  State  law  or  State  control.  They  know  no  law,  except  their  own  de- 
sires. And  what  are  their  desires?  No  one  can  tell  their  limit.  We  know 
some  of  them.  They  wish  to  stop  the  diversion  of  water  from  all  the  rivers 
of  Kern,  Tulare  and  Fresno.  They  wish  Kern,  Buena  Vista  and  Tulare  lakes 
declared  navijgable,  because  such  declaration  would  stop  the  diversion  of  wa- 
ters from  the  rivers. 

Every  acre  of  the  land  given  to  these  people  was  granted  to  the  State,  with 
the  expectation  that  it  would  be  reclaimed.  The  good  faith  of  the  State  is 
pledged  to  that  effect.    The  policy  of  the  State,  as  shown  by  itts  laws,  for  the 


225 


disposition  of  swamp  lauds,  is  to  effectuate  their  reclamation.  Are  these 
lands  reclaimed?  By  no  means.  They  are  to-day  in  nearly  the  same  condi- 
tion in  which  they  were  thirty  years  ago.  The  floods  of  the  rivers  overspread 
them  from  time  to  time,  limited  in  some  degree  by  the  reduction  of  volume 
of  water  caused  by  the  diversion  for  irrigations  above.  To  what  base  use  is 
the  generous  gift  of  the  State  now  being  prostituted?  Why  some  of  the 
grantees  now  propose  not  to  reclaim  these  lands,  but  to  invoke  the  aid  of  the 
State  and  of  the  United  States,  to  make  them  a  perpetual  swamp,  and  to  de- 
clare Kern,  Buena  Vista  and  Tulare  lakes  navigable.  The  accomplishment 
of  their  object,  the  success  of  their  efforts  involve  the  annihilation  of  every 
farm  watered  from  the  tributary  rivers.  Water  cannot  be  taken  from  streams 
emptying  into  navigable  lakes.  The  entire  Tulare  valley  must  cease  irriga- 
tion. Tulare,  Kern  and  Buena  Vista  lakes  must  be  maintained  full  to  over- 
flowing, All  this  is  but  another  phase  of  the  irrepressible  conflict  between 
appropriation  and  riparianism.  Appropriation  means  irrigation,  develop- 
ment and  population  for  this  valley;  riparianism  means  an  uncultivated  des- 
ert, surrounding  a  great  malarial  swamp,  fit  only  for  frog  wallows. 


The  Colusa  Sun. 

The  Irrigationists  ]>Iove. 

The  committee  having  in  charge  the  legislation  marked  out  by  the  conven- 
tion held  at  Fresno,  in  November,  1884,  met  at  Fresno,  last  Monday,  and 
adopted  an  address  to  the  friends  of  irrigation  throughout  the  State,  and 
called  a  convention  to  meet  at  San  Francisco  on  the  20th  of  May.  It  also 
recommended  the  formation  of  clubs  throughout  the  State,  for  the  purpose 
of  making  the  political  parties  take  up  the  question  and  place  the  friends  of 
the  proposed  measures  on  the  State  and  Legislature  tickets.  The  members 
of  these  clubs  will  be  pledged  to  support  no  one  not  sound  on  irrigation. 
That  is  placed  above  politics.  And  why  should  it  not  be?  What  is  there  be- 
tween the  two  parties  so  important  as  the  fixing  for  the  tens  of  thousands  of 
happy  homes?  Who  of  all  of  us  has  felt  any  difference  between  the  adminis- 
trations of  George  Perkins  and  George  Stoneman?  But  we  all  feel  a  differ- 
ence between  half  of  the  State  lying  waste  and  that  half  covered  over  with 
pastures,  and  orchards,  and  vineyards,  and  gardens,  and  fields  of  golden 
grain.  We  all  feel  a  difference  between  having  a  State  with  a  population  of 
five  inhabitants  to  the  square  mile  and  a  possible  population  of  105  to  the 
square  mile !  In  Southern  California  there  are  miles  and  miles,  and  millions 
upon  millions  of  acres  of  dreary  wastes,  which,  with  the  water  now  running 
to  waste  put  over  them,  would  support  a  dense  population.  The  Sacramento 
Valley,  although  capable  of  producing  a  fair  crop  of  smaU  grain  on  the  aver- 
age season,  is  subject  to  short  crop,  and  at  best,  most  of  the  land  can  be  cul- 
tivated but  once  in  two  years.  With  irrigation,  it  can  be  made  to  support  al- 
most one  hundred  times  as  many  people  as  it  can  without  it.  Except  along 
the  margins  of  the  river,  where  winter  flooding  can  be  depended  upon,  our 


226 


lands  in  this  valley  must  be  consigned  to  small  grain.  Fruit,  it  is  true,  can 
be  grown  upon  mogt  of  the  land  with  good  cultivation,  but  the  production  of 
any  orchard,  year  after  year,  can  be  more  than  doubled  by  once  flooding  dur- 
ing the  winter.  If  then,  an  orchard  will  net  $100  an  acre  a  year,  without 
flooding,  it  will  net  more  than  $200  with  flooding,  and  does  not  this  make  it 
worth  while  to  work  for  some  laws  that  will  promote  irrigation?  What  po- 
litical party  can  give  you  a  difference  of  $50  to  $100  an  acre  in  the  produc- 
tions of  the  soil?  "Water  can  be  put  over  about  all  the  lands  of  the  Sacra- 
mento Valley  for  $3  or  $4  an  acre,  if  we  had  the  proper  kind  of  laws.  We 
mean  that  the  canals  can  be  made  tor  this  amount,  and  it  will  take,  perhaps, 
as  much  more  to  fix  the  land  for  it;  but  what  would  be  $10,  or  even  $20,  an 
acre  for  land  all  ready  to  water  at  any  season  of  the  year?  Look  on  the  land 
Roberts  has  been  selling  in  the  neighborhood  of  Colusa!  It  has  sold  as 
high  as  $110  an  acre,  with  the  privilege  of  a  ditch  that  will  flood  when  the 
river  is^twelve  or  fifteen  feet,  without  being  prepared  for  the  water!  Does  any 
one  suppose  that  it  would  have  brought  $80,  or  even  $50,  an  acre  with  no  pos- 
sibility ot  flooding  it?  We  say,  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  it  would 
not.  We  have  proof,  then,  that  the  possibility  of  flooding  at  high  water  has 
added  at  least  $60  an  acre  to  the  value  of  land;  and  if  so,  how  much  more 
would  land  be  worth,  fixed  to  flood  at  any  time? 

This  is  at  home  in'the  Sacramento  Valley,  where  we  have  a  fair  average 
rainfall.  There  are  portions  of  the  State  absolutely  without  water.  It  can  be 
made  fully  as  valuable  as  we  can  make  the  lands  of  the  Sacramento  Valley. 
We  have  some  64,000,000  acres  of  valley  lands  to  be  benefited  i  y  water.  A  sys- 
tem of  irrigation  will  add  $100  an  acre  on  the  average  to  the  value  of  this 
land,  aside  from  improvements,  or  $6,400,000,000  to  the  value  of  the  land  of 
the  State.  It  would  do  more.  It  would  give  Colusa  a  population  greater 
than  that  of  Sacramento  at  present;  it  would  give  Sacramento  a  population 
greater  than  the  present  population  of  San  Francisco,  and  give  San  Francisco 
and  Oakland  a  population  greater  than  that  of  New  York  and  Brooklyn,  with 
other  cities  increased  in  like  proportion!  This  would  add  as  much  more  to 
the  wealth  of  the  State.  Then  the  added  improvements  on  farms,  the  added 
orchards  and  vineyards,  with  the  personal  property  thereon,  would  add  as 
much  more,  so  that  we  can  say  that  the  irrigationists  hold  out  to  you  an  added 
wealth  to  the  State  of  $19,200,000,000,  with  a  capacity  to  support  10,000,000 
to  15,000,000  more  people  than  it  can  otherwise  support! 

There  are  boys  who  will  now  read  this  and  live  to  wonder  how  we,  an  en- 
thusiast, fell  so  far  short  of  the  mark! 

Go  south  and  look  at  irrigated  land  selling  for  as  much  as  $500  an  acre, 
and  the  same  kind  of  land  a  barren  waste.  Look  right  back  at  Colusa  to  the 
Boberts  tract,  and  others  to  which  we  have  alluded!  Go,  ask  Judge  Bridg- 
ford.  Dr.  Belton,  J.  B.  DeJarnatt,  Dr.  Gray,  Jasper  Ford,  R.  T.  Powell,  J. 
H.  Pope,  L.  L.  Hicok,  Capt.  Ritchey,  A.  E.  Potter,  Oscar  Robinson,  Mrs. 
Banks,  and  others,  right  around  Colusa,  how  much  they  would  take  per  acre, 
and  be  forever  barred  from  water! 


227 


And  when  you  have  looked  there,  and  when  you  have  asked  these  people, 
who  have  as  yet  a  faint  glimmering  of  what  is  ahead,  then  come  and  show  to 
us,  if  you  can,  that  we  have  drawn  on  the  imagination  for  a  single  figure  set 
down! 

And  why  cannot  all  this  go  ahead  without  political  action? 

Our  Courts  hold  that  the  common  law  of  England,  except  where  we  have 
statutory  law  to  the  contrary,  is  the  law  of  this  State.  Under  that  law  no 
man  had  a  right  to  divert  water  from  a  stream  without  returning  it  to  the 
stream  as  pure  as  he  found  it.  Each  bank  owner  had  a  right  to  demand  that 
the  full  volume  of  the  stream  flowed  past  his  land.  This  put  in  practice 
would,  of  course  preclude  the  possibility  of  irrigation  at  all.  Now  about  all 
the  bank  owners— otherwise  the  riparian  owners — favor  taking  the  water  out 
of  the  streams,  but  there  are  a  few  end  men — men  who  own  land  at  the  ends 
of  the  same  streams — who  see  big  money  in  claiming  that  the  water  shall  not 
be  diverted.  There  is  no  law  for  paying  these  end  men  a  fair  compensation 
for  what  they  have,  and  move  on.  They  have  the  power  to  say,  not  only 
that  there  shall  be  no  further  progress  in  California,  but  that  the  millions  of 
dollars  invested  in  canals,  the  hundreds  of  millions  of  property  dependent  on 
diversions  of  water  already  made,  shall  be  thrown  away— to  say  that  the  mag- 
nificent orange  groves,  the  orchards  and  vineyards  and  grass  fields,  depend- 
ent on  the  water,  shall  once  more  become  a  desert! 

No  man  shall  stand  in  front  of  the  car  of  progress! 


The  Contra  Costa  Gazette. 

The  Benefits  of  Irrig-ation. 

A  State  convention  composed  of  all  who  favor  the  platform  and  objects  of 
the  Fresno  Convention  of  Irrigators  will  be  held  in  San  Francisco  on  Thurs- 
day, May  20th.  No  supporter  of  riparian  ownership  will  be  permitted  to 
participate  in  the  proceedings.  The  convention  will  effect  a  permanent  central 
organization,  to  perfect  the  scheme  of  laws  already  prepared  by  the  Executive 
Committee  and  to  urge  them  to  success  in  the  next  Legislature.  In  their  ad- 
dress to  the  members  of  the  Riverside  and  Fresno  Irrigation  Conventions,  the 
Executive  Committee  state  that  great  areas  are  already  made  fruitful,  and  en- 
terprising thousands  under  the  protection  of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation, 
produce  a  generous  livelihood  for  themselves  and  a  great  surplus  for  export, 
which  adds  to  the  commonwealth.  Millions  of  dollars  are  invested  in  canals 
and  ditches  primarily  devoted  to  irrigation,  while  the  systems  which  were 
built  for  hydraulic  mining  debouch  upon  plains  that  are  athirst,  and  used  for 
irrigation,  will  create  greater  wealth  than  gilded  the  dreams  of  their  projec- 
tors. 

But  the  acre  age  already  subjected  to  irrigation  is  insignificant  compared 
with  the  desert  still  unreclaimed.  Our  great  interior  valleys  contain  a  terri- 
tory of  64,000,000  acres,  which  is  one  and  a  fourth  the  size  of  Great  Bri- 
tain with  her  30,000,000  people,  and  yet  this  immense  territory,  an  empire  in 


228 

itself,  is  inhabited  by  only  284,000  souls.  The  present  unoccupied  area  of 
these  valleys  should  support  over  10,000,000  people,  a  result  which  can  be 
brought  about  only  by  irrigation. 

The  conflict  between  riparian  ownership  and  irrigation  will  doubtless  be 
stubborn  and  prolonged.  Some  individual  rights  will  be  trespassed  upon, 
and  a  certain  amount  of  injustice  will  be  done.  But  the  people  of  California 
see  more  clearly  every  day  the  necessity  of  irrigation  in  her  great  valleys  if 
they  are  to  be  built  up  and  are  to  add  to  the  population,  wealth  and  resources 
of  the  State. 


Tulare  Register. 

Myrick  vs.  McKee, 

Friends  of  irrigation  will  not  soon  forget  the  famous  decision  by  the  Su- 
preme  Court,  rendered  in  the  case  of  Lux  vs.  Haggin,  on  the  eve  of  the  elec- 
tion two  years  ago,  by  which  the  ultra  riparian  doctrine  was  made,  for  the 
time  being  at  any  rate,  the  law  of  this  land.  That  decision  was  rendered 
just  in  the  nick  of  time  to  help  the  election  of  certain  judicial  candidates," 
and  designedly  so  rendered,  we  have  no  manner  of  doubt,  and  that  that  help 
was  most  effective  is  beyond  question.  Now  our  Supreme  Court  consists  in 
seven  fat,  sleek  and  well  paid  judges,  of  whom  three  are  wise,  and  four  are 
otherwise.  As  soon  as  we  saw  the  text  of  that  famous  decision  we  telegraphed 
to  the  Secretary  of  State  to  ascertain  what  judges  went  out  of  office  soonest 
and  when.  We  received  arswer  that  the  terms  of  office  of  Justices  M.  H. 
Myrick  and  S.  B.  McKee  terminate  next  November.  Of  these  two,  Myrick 
was  found  upon  the  side  of  eulightened  and  progressive  jurisprudence,  in 
favor  of  the  due  appropriation  of  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  and  strong- 
ly opposed  to  such  a  construction  of  the  law  of  riparian  rights  as  should  ren- 
der that  law  unsuited  to  the  natural  condition  of  soil  and  climate  that-  God 
established  on  this  Coast  ages  before  man  was  created.  On  the  other  hand, 
Mr.  Justice  S.  B.  McKee,  holding  in  his  hands  the  balance  of  power,  the  op- 
portunity to  decide  what  should  be  the  law  of  this  land,  in  a  separate  con- 
curring opinion,  more  riparian  if  anything  than  that  of  his  three  liparian 
associates,  fixed  upon  this  dry  and  parched  State  the  riparian  law  of  wet  and 
misty  England,  a  law  that  has  been  obsolete  at  home  for  nearly  a  hundred 
ye<trs. 

In  our  very  next  issue  after  the  rendering  of  this  decision,  we  took  the  ground 
that  irrigators  must  make  the  election  of  Supreme  Court  Justices  an  issue  in 
the  next  campaign.  We  took  the  ground  that  when  the  highest  authorities  in 
the  courts  of  last  resort  disagreed  as  to  what  was  law,  the  people  had  a  right 
to  determine  at  the  polls  what  they  would  have  as  law.  We  still  adhere  to 
that  proposition,  believing  in  its  wisdom  and  justice.  It  therefore  follows 
that  Justice  Myrick,  having  shown  himself  upon  the  right  side  of  this  all-im- 
portant question,  should  be  re-elected  to  the  position  he  now  holds,  but  Jus- 
tice McKee  having  shown  that  he  holds  opinions  most  unfortunate  for  one  in 


229 


Tiis  position  to  hold,  should  come  down  out  of  a  place  he  is  unfitted  to  fill, 
and  render  it  up  to  a  more  progressive  and  broader  minded  jurist.  Justice 
Myrick  should  get  the  vote  of  every  friend  to  irrigation;  Justice  McKee 
should  not  get  a  single  one. 

Oakland  Times. 

The  irrigationists  are  evidently  determined  to  win  their  fight  in  the  next 
legislature.  They  have  gone  to  work  in  the  right  way  by  organizing  in  every 
town  and  village  in  the  southern  and  middle  portion  of  the  State,  where  irri- 
gation is  a  necessity.  They  have  men  of  brains  at  the  head  of  their  organi- 
zation, and  as  these  men  know  every  law-maker  who  opposed  the  measure 
during  the  last  session,  it  is  very  certain  that  but  few  of  them  will  be  re- 
elected and  they  should  not  be. 


Dixon  (Solano)  Tribune. 

There  is  no  public  question  that  is  of  more  vital  consequence  to  California 
to-day,  than  that  of  irrigation.  The  development  of  a  greater  part  of  the 
southern  counties  of  the  State,  as  well  as  Tulare,  Fresno,  Colusa,  and  other 
sections;  admirably  adapted  to  fruit  and  grains,  depend  in  a  great  measure 
upon  the  proper  solution  of  this  question.  Solano  is  only  indirectly  interest- 
ed, but  the  Tribune  will  cheerfully  lend  its  influence  and  support  to  that 
large  body  of  citizens  who  are  interested  in  securing  such  legislation  as  will 
promote  the  success  of  a  practicable  irrigation  scheme.  The  water  courses 
of  California  now  run  wastefully  to  the  sea.  Every  drop  of  water  so  wasted, 
ought  to  be  utilized  in  fertilizing  and  increasing  the  productiveness  of  a  large 
area  of  land  that  is  now  comparatively  valueless. 


Resources  of  California. 

Riparian    Rights. 

The  people  of  California  are  now  entirely  awake  to  the  importance  of  irri- 
gation, and  the  necessity  for  laws  establishing  and  regulating  the  use  of  the 
waters  of  the  natural  streams  of  the  State  for  that  purpose  is  generally  con- 
ceded. This  sentiment  is  bound  to  find  expression  through  the  Jaw-making 
powers,  which  will  result  in  defining  the  rights  of  irrigators  and  riparian 
claimants.  This  is  a  question  in  which  the  vital  interests  of  our  State  are 
involved,  for  without  irrigation  an  immense  area  of  fertile  and  valuable  land 
could  never  be  cultivated  and  would  remain  barren  as  the  Desert  of  Sahara. 
We  are  in  favor  of  the  condemnation  of  the  rights  of  all  riparian  owners 
under  the  old  common  law;  an  equitable  compensation  for  such  rights;  and 
the  establishment  by  legislation  of  the  right  to  use  the  waters  of  the  natural 
streams  of  this  State  for  this  purpose  of  irrigation;  and  such  other  regula- 
tions as  will  prevent  the  monopoly  of  water  and  the  unjust  taxation  of  those 
who  make  a  lawful  use  of  it. 


230 


Kern  County  Californian. 

A  New  Paper. 

We  have  received  the  first  number  of  the  Irrigator,  a  paper  published  at 
the  new  town,  Selma,  in  Fresno  county.  It  is  respectable  in  appearance^ 
and,  in  its  journalistic  merits,  highly  creditable  to  the  editor  and  manager, 
W.  T.  Lyon.  Speaking  of  the  name  selected  for  his  paper,  he  says:  "After 
considering  all  names  suggested  and  consulting  with  some  of  the  leading  cit- 
izens of  the  section,  we  concluded  to  give  the  paper  a  distinctive  title,  one 
that  would  be  suggestive  of  its  surroundings,  so  we  fixed  on  the  name  Irriga' 
tor.  Irrigation  is  the  great  backbone  of  our  section.  Without  water  our 
land  would  be  a  desert  waste,  but  with  it  it  is  a  blooming  garden.  Every 
farmer  in  the  district  is  an  irrigator,  and  every  business  man  in  town  is  inter- 
ested in  sustaining  and  extending  the  blessings  to  be  derived  from  irrigation; 
therefore,  as  the  mouthpiece  of  the  farmers  and  business  men,  what  more 
suggestive  title  could  we  have  assumed  for  our  paper?  " 


Stockton  Mail- 

Let  us  Irrig'ate. 

The  San  Francisco  Alia  has  performed  a  valuable  service  to  the  whole  State 
by  taking  the  lead  in  the  advocacy  of  irrigation  and  maintaining  the  position 
with  its  accustomed  vigor. 

This  should  be  considered  the  question  of  all  questions  afi'ecting  the  vital 
interests  of  California,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  the  expulsion  of  the 
Chinese.  Our  State  is  not  at  present,  take  it  all  in  all,  developed  up  to  more 
than  one-quarter  of  its  possible  productiveness.  Nothing  would  develop  it 
so  rapidly,  so  completely  and  so  permanently  as  irrigation.  It  is  sufficient 
for  present  purposes  to  consider  only  the  region  contiguous  to  Stockton. 
Stockton  ought  to  have  a  population  equal  in  numbers  to  the  present  popu- 
lation of  the  city  and  county,  and  the  county  outside  of  the  city  should  be 
sustaining  to-day  in  active  agricultural,  viticultural  and  horticultural  indus- 
tries fully  thirty  thousand  people,  instead  of  its  present  fifteen  thousand,  or 
less.  Nobody  questions  the  outside  possibilities  of  soil  and  climate.  Old 
citizens  and  recent  acquisitions,  pioneers  and  tenderfeet — all  are  agreed  that 
this  will  be  a  region  of  great  productiveness  some  day. 

The  only  question  then  is,  how  and  when  is  the  change  to  be  brought 
about.  As  to  the  how,  it  is  plain  that  the  only  thing  needful  to  make  this 
portion  of  the  valley  blossom  like  a  rose  the  year  round  is  water.  Water,, 
water  everywhere,  nor  any  drop  for  the  famishing  vegetable  life  seen  every- 
where during  the  summer  months,  is  what  impresses  all  first  observers.  The 
rivers  all  run  wastefully  to  the  sea,  while  the  plains  on  to  which  they  might 
easily  be  diverted  are  parched  and  forbidding. 

There  are  three  sources  from  which  this  portion  of  the  valley  might  be 
abundantly  watered  dming  the  entire  dry  season.    One  is  on  the  Stanislana 


231 


River,  on  the  south,  another  is  the  Mokelumne,  on  the  north,  and  the  thircf 
is  the  Salt  Spring  valley  reservoir,  between  the  two.  It  has  been  estimated 
that  for  $150,000  the  Stanislaus  River  could  be  made  to  irrigate  30,000  acres 
of  land.  The  increase  in  the  value  of  the  land  resulting  from  irrigation 
■would  more  than  double  the  cost  of  the  lateral  ditches.  This  will  be  done 
some  day,  and  the  Mokelumne  will  also  be  made  to  serve  the  farmer  and  the 
orchardist.  What  a  change  will  be  on  the  face  of  nature  hereabout  then. 
This  county  can  produce  anything  that  is  grown  in  the  State,  if  only  the 
plants  and  trees  are  watered. 

Why  then  let  the  rivers  mock  the  plains  and  the  soil  withhold  its  most 
precious  bounties?  The  old  riparian  law  might  have  been  good  enough  for 
England,  but  it  is  no  more  applicable  to  California  than  a  law  would  be 
forbidding  the  navigation  of  our  rivers  by  any  sort  of  craft  but  those  pro- 
pelled by  sail. 


Los  Angeles  Express. 

Org'anize  for  Irrigation. 

The  living,  burning  question  of  the  day  in  Southern  California  is  the  sub- 
ject of  irrigation.  Upon  this  problem  turns  the  future  of  our  fair  land- 
Whether  we  shall  continue  to  prosper  and  progress;  whether  the  soil  shall 
continue  to  yield  its  crops;  whether  our  population  shall  continue  toincrease,^ 
or  whether  our  vast  valleys  shall  be  relegated  to  a  desert  state  and  the  happy, 
prosperous  homes  of  our  people  be  broken  up,  depends  upon  the  issue  be- 
tween irrigation  and  ripadanism .  Unless  the  waters  which  flow  down  to  us 
from  the  mountains  are  justly  and  equitably  distributed  among  the  people 
who  inhabit  the  lands,  to  which  it  belongs,  instead  of  being  held  as  a  monop- 
oly by  a  few  riparian  owners,  these  great  agricultural  and  fruit-growing  coun- 
ties will  perish. 

Until  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  announced  the  astounding  doctrine 
that  the  rule  of  the  common  law  in  England  that  running  streams  must  be 
allowed  to  flow  unvexed  to  their  mouths,  must  be  enforced  in  California, 
none  but  a  few  cattle  kings  and  their  retainers  questioned  the  right  of  the 
people  to  appropriate  water  for  irrigation.  Our  condition  in  this  regard  is  as 
dissimilar  to  that  of  England  as  our  mild  and  luxurious  climate  is  to  that  of 
Labrador.  We  had  supposed  that  the  common  law  of  a  country  which  the 
courts  should  enforce  is  that  body  of  customary  law  which  has  grown  up 
from  the  especial  circumstances  and  necessities  of  the  surrounding  physical 
conditions.  But  no,  our  court  says  the  common  law  of  England  is  the  rule 
of  decision,  and  that  therefore  there  shall  be  no  irrigation.  It  is  true  that 
the  statute  adopting  the  common  law  as  the  rale  of  decision  provides  that 
such  shall  be  the  rule  only  when  the  laws  of  the  State  do  not  provide  other- 
wise; and  it  is  true  that  the  customary  law  of  the  State  and  many  of  the  stat- 
utes recognize  the  right  of  appropriation  of  water  for  irrigation,  nevertheless 
the  broad  proposition  is  laid  down  in  Lux  vs.  Haggin  that  water  cannot  be 
diverted  from  a  running  stream. 


232 


Our  readers  will  remember  the  action  of  the  Kiverside  and  Fresno  Irri- 
vgatine:  Convention,  They  will  remember  the  labors  of  the  committee  ap- 
pointed by  the  latter  body  to  secure  relief  from  the  Legislature,  and  the  fail- 
ure owing  to  corrupt  influences  in  the  State  Senate. 

The  Legislative  Committee  of  the  Fresno  Convention  have  again  met  and  a 
-State  Irrigating  Convention  has  been  decided  upon.  A  plan  of  organization 
has  been  agreed  to  whereby  the  great  end  may  now  be  attained. 

We  repeat  that  the  prosperity  and  the  very  life  of  Southern  California  is  at 
stake  in  this  burning  issue.  Therefore  let  the  people  organize.  We  have 
the  power  to  enforce  our  demands  upon  both  political  parties.  This  is  not  a 
political  question,  but  it  is  a  question  that  politicians  dare  not  ignore. 


Merced  'Express. 

The  Irrig-atien  Convention. 

It  is  probable  that  the  proposed  Irrigation  Convention  will  noieet  at  San 
Francisco,  and  will  be  composed  of  all  classes  interested  in  the  development 
of  the  interior  of  the  State,  whether  directly  engaged  in  irrigation  or  not.  We 
understand  that  the  purpose  of  this  convention  is  to  exercise  the  consolidated 
influence  of  those  in  favor  of  the  right  to  appropriate  the  waters  of 
streams  for  agricultural  purposes.  We  hope,  in  issuing  a  call  for  this  con- 
vention,  that  the  committee  will  make  it  plainly  understood  that  the  contest 
is  against  riparianism.  The  convention  is  to  be  essentially  and  emphatically 
anti-riparian.  A  riparianist  has  no  more  place  in  this  convention  than  a 
•Republican  has  in  a  Democratic  Convention,  or  vice  versa.  The  convention 
will  represent  those  who  look  for  a  basis  of  action  to  the  irrigation  bills  pre- 
sented to  the  last  session  of  the  Legislature  by  the  committee  from  the  irriga- 
»tion  conventions,  and  who  propose  to  be  represented  and  served  by  officers 
elected  at  the  next  election,  holding  views  in  harmony  with  them.  Strong 
legislative  action  is  required.  A  constitutional  amendment  is  needed  to  assert 
the  doctrine  of  appropriation  and  to  pronounce  the  common  law  rule  of  ripa- 
rian rights  unsuited  to  our  conditions  and  necessities  as  well  for  agricultural 
as  for  mining  purposes.  Efl&cient  legislation  for  the  just  regulation  of  the 
use  and  distribution  of  water  is  of  great  importance.  Wherever  the  water  is 
insuflBcient  for  all,  economy  in  its  use  is  a  necessity,  which  should  be  en- 
forced by  legislative  direction.  And  the  towering  necessity  of  all,  is  a  gradual 
change  from  election  to  election  of  the  personel  of  the  Supreme  Court,  so 
that  in  time,  instead  of  having  a  bench  not  in  accord  upon  the  great  contro- 
'Versy  over  the  law  of  water  rights,  we  shall  have  a  unanimous  court.  A  di- 
vided court  unsettles  old  law  without  establishing  new.  There  is  a  remedy 
for  this.  Make  the  court  unanimous  either  upon  one  side  or  the  other  of  the 
•question.  When  the  judges  cannot  agree  upon  great  questions,  how  are  they 
to  be  finally  determined?  We  are  not  now  advocating  the  overthrow  of  a 
<50urt  in  order  to  obtain  one  which  will  make  law  or  usurp  the  powers  of  the 
legislature.    But  what  the  law  is,  must  be  settled.     Only  a  unanimous  court 


233 

<3an  well  establish  it.  The  people  are  called  upon  to  select  the  judiciary. 
They  are  expecting  to  take  part  not  only  in  electing  them,  but  also  in  select- 
ing the  candidates  of  the  great  political  parties.  Party  lines  are  not  now,  as 
they  were  formerly,  very  strictly  drawn  in  voting  for  judges.  Learning, 
ability  and  experience  in  a  judicial  candidate  command  support  without  re- 
gard to  partisan  predilections.  All  other  things  being  equal,  however,  party 
ties  have  great  control,  and  no  man  can  justly  be  taken  to  task  for  voting  in 
such  a  case  for  his  own  party's  candidate.  Likewise  without  impropriety  a 
voter  who  believes  that  the  future  of  the  State  lies  in  the  establishment  of 
irrigation  and  putting  an  end  to  the  present  judicial  delusion  as  to  riparian 
rights,  will  select  from  candidates  for  judicial  position  those  who  are  not 
tainted  with  riparian  views. 


Fresno  Daily  Evening  Expositor. 

The  Lieaven  Working^. 

The  leaven  stirred  into  the  body  politic  by  means  of  the  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion held  in  this  city  in  1884,  and  the  Executive  and  Legislative  Committees 
appointed  by  it,  is  working  finely,  and  the  subject  of  irrigation  is  being  in- 
telligently discussed  all  over  the  State.  The  leading  journals  of  the  coast  are 
urging  it  as  the  leading  issue  before  the  people,  and  it  seems  now  certain  that 
the  political  parties  will  recognize  it  as  the  dominant  issue  when  their  party 
platforms  are  made.  Even  the  close-fisted  and  stolid-headed  money-bags  and 
merchants  of  San  Francisco  are  beginning  to  see  that  it  is  to  their  interests 
and  the  interest  of  their  city  to  have  the  doctrine  of  riparianism  wiped  out, 
and  the  people  left  free  to  divert  the  water  over  the  barren,  dry  and  treeless 
plains  to  enrich  and  render  it  productive.  They  have  been  slow  to  learn,  but 
now  that  the  light  of  truth  has  dawned  upon  their  vision,  we  may  safely 
count  upon  at  least  their  silent  influence. 

The  wonderful  results  that  have  been  accomplished  in  Fresno  county  by 
irrigation  has  done  much  to  bring  about  this  revolution  of  sentiment.  In 
spite  of  opposition  of  all  kinds,  this  county  has  continued  to  thrive,  growing 
from  an  unpopulated  barren  sand  plain  in  1874  to  the  proud  position  it  now 
holds,  with  its  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  under  cultivation,  embracing 
thousands  of  acres  of  orchards,  vineyards  and  alfalfa  fields;  peopled  by  thou- 
sands of  contented  and  intelligent  families,  all  of  whom  are  well  on  the  high- 
way to  affluence. 

A  few  at  first  were  induced  to  try  what  could  be  done  by  the  use  of  water. 
They  found  that  our  apparently  worthless  soil  could  be  made  to  produce 
abundantly,  and  that  this  section  was  the  natural  home  for  the  favorite  fruits 
of  the  world;  that  the  vine  thrived  and  yielded  in  quantity  and  quality  fruit 
that  could  nowhere  on  the  globe  be  excelled,  and  that  under  the  influence  of 
our  cloudless  summer  skies,  raisins  rivalling  those  of  Spain  could  be  produc- 
ed; that  from  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  wines  not  excelled  by  the  product  of 
France  could  be  made,  and  that  here  were  to  be  found  all  the  elements  need- 
ed to  maintain  a  dense  population  of  thrifty  people.   They  noised  about  their 


234 

discovery,  and  others  oame  aud  also  succeeded,  and  they  in  turn  induced^ 
others  to  come,  until  Fresno  county  has  become  known  to  all  the  civilized 
nations  of  the  earth. 

But  the  claim  of  the  ranch  owners  on, the  banks  of  the  streams  that  they 
owned  all  the  water  of  the  rivers  sprung  up.  Common  Law  Judges  held  their 
claims  to  be  valid,  aud  a  cloud  was  cast  over  water  titles,  and  the  appropria- 
tion of  water  in  other  counties  for  irrigation  purposes  was  stopped. 

But  the  Fresno  farmers  paid  no  attention  to  these  decisions.  They  felt 
that  they  were  unjust  and  not  in  accord  with  the  fundamental  principles  of 
our  Government,  so  they  took  the  water  and  prospered;  but  other  localities,, 
under  the  injunctions  of  the  courts,  were  not  so  united,  and  not  so  well  pre- 
pared to  defy  the  legal  tribunals,  so  they  have  not  progressed. 

The  Fresno  Convention  endeavored  to  secure  the  passage  of  laws  that 
would  enable  the  people  elsewhere  to  reap  the  benefits  that  were  to  be  derived 
from  irrigation,  but  corrupt  representatives  and  an  indifferent  public  made 
the  effort  a  failure;  but  the  seed  then  sown  is  producing  fruit,  and  it  is  now 
certain  that  the  needed  laws  will  soon  be  enrolled  in  the  statutes  of  the  State, 
and  then  an  era  of  prosperity  will  dawn  that  will  culminate  in  making  San 
Francisco  the  second  commercial  city  of  the  land,  and  the  Sacramento  and 
San  Joaquin  valleys  the  richest  and  most  populous  portions  of  the  country. 
The  elements  are  at  hand  to  accomplish  these  ends. 


Los  Angeles  Express. 

A  Stirrings  Irrig'ation  Address. 

The  call  issued  by  the  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Con- 
yention  is  worthy  the  attention  of  every  citizen.  The  question  involved  is 
of  vast  importance  to  the  producers  of  the  State,  and  through  them  to  all 
other  classes.  Upon  the  water  supply  depends  almost  wholly  the  prosperity 
and  future  development  of  Southern  California.  A  few  years  ago  State  Engi- 
neer Hall  devised  a  system  of  reservoirs,  which  if  adopted  would  render  it 
unnecessary  to  depend  almost  wholly,  as  now,  upon  the  streams.  But  even 
if  a  reservoir  plan  was  adopted  by  the  Legislature,  and  carried  out  by  aid  of 
State  funds,  the  rights  of  the  people  in  relation  to  the  waters  of  the  streams 
would  remain  the  same,  and  these  should  never  be  surrendered.  The  Su- 
preme Court  may  sustain  the  English  riparian  law  (which  is  wholly  inappli- 
cable to  the  peculiar  condition  of  the^water  supply  of  California),  but  the 
people  can  put  on  the  bench  and  in  the  Legislature,  men  who  will  be  govern- 
ed by  the  needs  of  California  rather  than  by  the  common  law  of  England ^ 
and  to  do  this  it  is  necessary  to  organize. 


235 
Los  Angeles  Express. 

Tlie  Q,uestion  of  tlte  Hour. 

The  right  of  the  people  to  the  use  of  the  water  of  our  rivers  and  streams 
■for  the  purpose  of  irrigation  is  not  a  political  question.  It  is  one  that  con- 
cerns all  parties,  and  which  virtually  affects  all  the  material  interests  of  the 
State.  If  the  demands  of  the  riparianists  are  to  prevail,  the  majority  of  the 
producers  of  this  State  will  be  in  a  pitiable  condition.  They  will  in  many 
cases  be  deprived  of  the  use  of  water  now  appropriated  by  them,  and  be 
forced  to  develop,  at  great  expense,  other  sources  of  supply,  and  this  in  some 
localities,  if  not  impracticable,  will  involve  expense  greater  than  the  value  of 
the  land  to  be  irrigated,  a  result  equivalent  to  financial  ruin. 

Southern  California  has  shown  what  can  be  done  in  the  way  of  reclaiming 
arid  lands  by  means  of  irrigating  ditches.  All  the  prosperous  colonies  of  this 
county  have  been  built  upon  the  right  of  the  people  to  divert  the  water  of 
running  streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation.  The  whole  country  would  be 
a  desert  to-day  were  it  not  for  the  exercise  of  this  right.  The  water  of  the 
rivers  has  made  the  dry  soil  fruitful  and  has  changed  a  treeless  and  unpro- 
ductive region  into  one  of  the  garden  spots  of  the  earth. 

California  is  just  entering  upon  an  era  of  great  prosperity.  The  thoughts 
of  thousands  of  people  at  the  East  are  now  turned  towards  this  Coast,  and  if 
the  question  of  water  supply  is  settled  in  favor  of  irrigators'  rights  we  will 
soon  have  a  very  great  increase  of  population.  Dakota,  notwithstanding  its 
winters  of  bitter  cold,  has  doubled  its  population  in  five  years;  certainly  Cal- 
ifornia, with  its  genial  warmth  and  clear  skies,  should  be  able  to  do  as  well. 
When  the  laws  of  the  State  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  irrigators  are  brought 
into  harmony  with  the  needs  of  the  people,  and  a  feeling  of  security  as  to 
water  rights  is  established,  the  inducements  offered  to  settlers  will  be  greatly 
augmented. 

It  is  probable  that  the  nominees  of  both  parties  for  legislative  and  judicial 
positions  at  the  coming  election  will  favor  the  early  settlement  of  this  ques- 
tion in  accordance  with  common  sense  rather  than  common  law,  and  as  the 
interests  of  the  people  require;  but  this  is  a  matter  that  cannot  safely  be  left 
to  chance.  The  people  must  organize  irrespective  of  party,  so  as  to  be  in  a 
position  to  demand  the  nomination  of  men  known  to  be  in  the  interests  of 
the  people.  It  is  not  a  question  that  need  to  bring  distraction  into  politics; 
on  the  contrary,  it  should  have  the  effect  of  toning  down  political  asperities 
and  making  the  campaign  a  contest  between  parties  which,  on  one  of  the 
leading  questions  at  least,  hold  each  other  in  mutual  respect. 


Oakland  Tribune. 

Iriigratien  to  tbe  Front. 

The  address  of  the  State  Irrigation  Committee,  published  in  another  col- 
umn, is  food  for  political  digestion.  There  is  no  announcement  for  the 
formation  of  an  independent  political  party,  but  there  is  an  intensity  of  pur- 


236 

pose  pervading  the  address  foreshadowing  a  distinct  political  organization  in- 
the  not  distant  future. 

Republican  party  leaders  had  best  give  the  subject  serious  consideration. 
Here  is  an  organized  movement  of  a  whole  community  to  be  met  in  the  field 
of  politics.  Will  the  Republican  party  give  it  the  cold  shoulder,  or  will  it 
take  up  the  cause  of  irrigation,  and  gain  the  gratitude  and  the  votes  of  the 
irrigators?  The  Committee  says:  "We  must  now  make  our  force  effective 
in  the  politics  of  the  State,  since  in  politics  the  Legislature  to  which  we 
appeal,  is  generated.  We  must  demonstrate  the  fact  that  there  are  political 
triumphs  greater  than  the  conquest  of  spoils,  and  that  is  to  be  done  by  going 
unitedly  into  politics  to  stay  until  our  rights  are  secured." 

The  Republican  party  has  ever  been  the  friend  of  progress.  Under  the 
wise  and  beneficent  policy  of  the  party  for  twenty-four  years,  the  internal 
improvement  of  the  country  by  the  settlement  of  the  public  lands  has  been 
without  parallel  in  the  history  of  nations.  As  a  part  of  this  policy  a  Re- 
publican Congress  passed  the  act  of  1866,  which  the  National  Supreme 
Court  has  held  to  be  recognition  of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  of  water, 
setting  the  seal  of  disapproval  upon  the  uncongenial  and  inapplicable  ripa- 
rian theory,  in  the  Pacific  States  and  Territories.  This  policy  has  reared 
civilization  in  a  desert  waste  of  country.  All  the  irrigators  ask  is  that  this 
policy  of  the  past  be  written  into  the  ineffaceable  law  of  the  land. 

The  Republican  party  cannot  hesitate  to  perpetuate  the  system  of  develop- 
ment framed  and  perfected  by  the  statesmen  whose  glory  was  born  of  the 
troublous  times  of  civil  strife  and  whose  names  live  in  every  heart. 

The  party  cannot  afford  to  repudiate  the  right  of  appropriation,  and  take 
back  what  was  freely  and  generously  given  as  the  reward  of  energy,  enter- 
prise and  industry. 


Oakland  Evening  Tribune. 

Tlie  Irrigation  Issue. 

The  next  Republican  State  Convention  will  have  to  deal  with  a  new  issue 
which  has  not  heretofore  had  political  consideration.  The  irrigaton  interests 
extending  throughout  the  State,  but  mainly  in  the  San  Joaquin  valley  and 
the  southern  counties,  have  gradually  attained  a  magnitude  hitherto  unknown. 
They  are  organizing  for  effective  work  in  the  next  campaign,  with  the  inten- 
tion of  forcing  themselves  into  politics  and  demanding  whatever  their  power 
will  enable  them  to  take  in  the  way  of  measures  for  their  protection. 

In  view  of  this  fact  it  will  be  well  to  consider  who  they  are,  what  are  their 
claims,  and  why  they  venture  into  the  domain  of  politics. 

Irrigation  is  carried  on  all  over  the  State,  but  the  principal  irrigating  coun- 
ties are  San  Bernardino,  San  Diego,  Los  Angelais,  Kern,  Tulare,  Fresno, 
Merced,  Stanislaus  and  San  Joaquin.  Most  of  the  land  in  these  counties  is 
of  the  character  known  as  desert  land,  and  is  unfit  for  cultivation  without  ir- 
rigation. The  population  thrives  by  irrigation.  Irrigation  is  carried  on 
through  canals  diverting  water  from  the  various  streams.    The  right  to  use 


237 

the  water  is  secured  by  appropriation  loDg  sanctioned  by  usage  and  custom- 
and  by  the  Courts,  and  embodied  finally  into  the  Code.  So  absolutely  is  ir- 
rigation dependent  on  the  right  of  appropriation  that  in  a  legal  sense  the 
■words  are  almost  interchangeable.  Without  appropriation  water  cannot  be 
had  for  irrigation. 

There  is  an  old  common  law  doctrine  that  the  waters  of  a  stream  must  flow 
within  the  banks  without  diversion,  and  under  this  doctrine  the  use  of  its 
water  for  irrigation  or  any  other  than  stock  or  domestic  purposes  is  forbidden. 
But  no  one  imagined  that  this  law  was  or  would  ever  become  a  rule  of  prop- 
erty in  this  State,  because  it  was  inapplicable  to  our  dry  climate  and  meager 
rainfall. 

A  little  over  a  year  ago,  however,  three  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  held 
for  appropriation,  whilst  the  majoritj^  four  of  the  Judges,  resurrected  the 
old  English  common  law  doctrine,  holding  that  the  water  of  a  stream  cannot 
be  used  for  irrigation  if  any  one  owning  land  upon  its  banks  says  no. 

At  this  a  common  fear  seized  everyone  connected  with  irrigation,  lest  this 
should  become  the  established  rule  of  property  in  the  State,  to  the  utter  de- 
struction of  irrigation. 

They  immediately  appealed  to  the  Legislature  for  some  protection,  but  ob- 
tained nothing.  Since  then  their  alarm  has  increased  to  almost  a  panic. 
They  are  arming  for  a  fight.  Their  just  demands  have  been  denied,  and 
they  are  about  to  use  their  united  power  to  take  by  political  force  that  which 
they  are  refused. 

These  irrigating  counties  poll  about  thirty-three  thousand  votes.  They  are 
greatly  exercised  over  this  question.  Irrigation  is  their  bread  and  butter. 
Politics  naturally  sink  out  of  sight  with  a  people  under  such  conditions. 
The  Eepublican  State  Convention  ought  to  recognize  the  justice  of  the  irri- 
gators' claims  and  take  a  stand  for  the  right  of  appropriation  if  it  would  se- 
cure the  lion's  share  of  this  vote.  Alameda  county  ought  to  send  a  delega- 
tion to  the  Convention  who  are  properly  impressed  with  the  importance  of 
developing  the  interior  by  irrigation.  The  flourishing  country  builds  up  a 
populous  city. 

San  Francisco  Examiner. 

Irrigation. 

The  necessity  for  a  well-ordered  and  thorough  system  of  irrigation  cannot 
be  too  forcibly  impressed  upon  the  minds  of  the  people  of  California.  Nor 
is  any  section  of  the  State  more  deeply  interested  in  reclaiming  the  desert 
lands  and  extending  the  benefits  of  profitable  cultivation  of  the  soil  than  San 
Francisco.  This  city  is  absolutely  dependent  on  the  prosperity  of  the  inte- 
rior of  the  State  for  its  own  advancement.  It  cannot  maintain  its  position  as 
a  commercial  metropolis,  or  widen  and  extend  its  influence  as  a  center  of 
trade,  without, a  populous  and  prosperous  community  to  back  it.  Nor  does 
it  require  any  argument  to  demonstrate  to  intelligent  minds  that  irrigation  is 
the  life  and  soul  of  industrial  progress  in  California.    Without  it  the  area  of 


238 


our  vineyards,  orchards  and  wheat  fields  would  be  much  reduced.  This  is  so 
evident  that  even  a  child  can  appreciate  the  fact. 

Under  these  circumstances  the  Examiner  has  felt  that  it  is  unnecessary  to 
Apologize  to  the  people  of  this  city  for  so  frequently  recurring  to  the  subject. 
It  would  be  greatly  in  fault  had  it  omitted  to  do  so.  The  business  of  a  news- 
paper is  to  put  before  the  public  questions  of  urgent  necessity  and  impress 
upon  the  people  engrossed  in  their  own  personal  affairs,  matters  which  vir- 
tually affect  the  welfare  of  the  community.  In  previous  articles  we  have 
shown  that  it  is  impossible  for  California  to  advance  in  her  career  of  marvel- 
ous prosperity,  or  even  maintain  her  present  conditions  of  development, 
without  an  irrigation  law  annulling  the  obsolete  doctrine  of  riparian  rights. 
It  follows,  as  a  logical  demonstration,  that  if  the  State  should  recede  in  ma- 
terial wealth,  or  stop  short  in  its  career  of  progress,  San  Francisco  must 
share  in  the  decline  and  abandon  forever  all  hopes  of  realizing  those  grand 
possibilities  which  appear  so  alluring  in  her  future. 

To  make  San  Francisco  a  city  rivaling  in  all  the  essential  elements  of 
progress  the  great  cities  of  the  East,  every  acre  of  the  rich  lands  of  California 
must  be  subjected  to  profitable  cultivation.  It  must  be  the  distributing  point 
for  all  the  magnificent  area  which  sweeps  in  waving  grain  fields  and  bloom- 
ing orchards  between  the  mountains  and  the  ocean.  To  accomplish  this, 
the  waters  of  the  rivers  and  streams  must  supply  the  arid  lands  for  the  fruc- 
tifying influence  of  production.  A  well-regulated  and  lawfully  provided  sys- 
tem of  irrigation  can  alone  do  this,  and  a  Legislature  thoroughly  alive  to  the 
importance  of  this  imperative  necessity  can  alone  assure  such  a  system.  No 
greater  duty,  therefore,  devolvos  upon  the  people  of  this  city  than  the  selec- 
tion of  representatives  to  the  next  Legislature  who  will  make  it  their  especial 
business  to  co-operate  with  the  movers  for  a  plan  for  the  general  irrigation  of 
the  lands  of  the  State.  The  subject  should  enter  into  all  political  considera- 
tions and  should  be  borne  in  mind  in  all  calculations  and  discussions  having 
for  their  6bject  the  well-being  of  California  and  the  growth  and  permanent 
prosperity  of  the  city  of  San  Francisco. 


Oakland  Tribune. 

Storaipe  Reservoirs  for  Irrigfation. 

It  is  asserted  by  some  of  the  newspapers  of  the  State  that  a  compromise 
may  be  effected  between  the  riparianists  and  the  irrigators  by  the  construc- 
tion of  huge  reservoirs  in  the  mountains  and  foot-hills  for  the  storage  of  the 
surplus  waters  of  winter  floods  and  the  melting  snows  of  summer,  and  thus 
the  war  of  extermination  now  raging  between  the  two  contending  factions  be 
brought  to  a  peaceful  termination.  Compromise  measures  sometimes  effect 
great  good,  but  this  is  an  emergency  where  no  compromise  is  possible.  The 
suggestion  of  the  storage  dams  as  a  relief  and  a  remedy  for  the  difficulty 
would  seem  to  imply  a  division  of  the  water  between  riparianists  and  irriga- 
tors, the  natural  flow  of  the  water  to  g5  to  the  former  and  the  contents  of  the 


239 

reservoirs  to  the  latter.  But  aside  from  the  fact  that  on  many  of  the  most 
important  irrigation  streams  of  the  State  no  suitable  sites  exist  for  the  con- 
struction of  impounding  reservoirs,  and  on  other  streams  it  would  be  imprac- 
ticable to  build  reservoirs  of  sufficient  capacity  to  supply  the  lands  already 
irrigated,  not  to  speak  of  the  vastly  greater  area  of  dry  land  yet  to  be  irri- 
gated, such  a  suggestion  of  division  implied  by  the  proposed  compromise 
measures  is  utterly  impracticable  and  untenable.  Take,  for  example,  a  stream 
like  Kings  River,  from  which  over  one  hundred  thousand  acres  is  irrigated, 
requiring  the  application  of  at  least  two  feet  of  water  per  annum  over  the 
whole  surface,  the  volume  of  water  required  to  be  stored  would  necessitate 
reservoirs  covering  an  area  of  five  thousand  acres  with  &n  average  depth  of 
forty  feet.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  watershed  of  that  stream  know 
that  there  are  no  such  sites  to  be  found,  and,  except  at  a  cost  utterly  beyond 
the  reach  of  the  irrigators  of  the  State,  that  amount  of  water  cannot  be  im- 
pounded on  that  stream  or  any  of  its  tributaries.  The  same  may  be  said  of 
the  Kaweah  and  other  streams  equally  important  to  the  irrigation  districts 
already  partially  developed.  Such  a  compromise  would  imply  that  the 
greater  proportion  of  the  water  now  flowing  must  be  wasted,  and  that  no 
further  extension  of  the  irrigated  area  be  permitted,  but  that  only  a  portion 
of  the  lands  already  under  irrigation  shall  be  allowed  the  privilege  of  continu- 
ing to  enjoy  water,  and  that  only  after  the  expenditure  of  large  sums  of  money 
in  storage  dams.  The  irrigators  claim,  and  with  justice,  that  all  the  waters 
in  the  streams  belong  to  the  lands  on  either  side  that  can  be  reached  by  them, 
and  that  storage  reservoirs,  when  built,  shall  be  built  for  the  purpose  of  ex- 
tending the  usefulness  of  the  streams,  and  increasing  the  irrigable  area,  and 
not  to  permit  the  continuance  of  waste.  Otherwise  the  money  expended  in 
reservoirs  might  as  well  be  thrown  into  the  sea  at  once,  as  the  result  would 
exactly  be  equivalent  to  it. 


Santa  Cruz  Daily  Sentinel. 

Irrigation. 

The  believers  in  the  doctrine  that  the  waters  of  this  State  belong  to  those 
who  will  appropriate  it  to  some  useful  purpose,  and  not  to  those  who  happen 
to  own  land  past  which  it  flows,  are  organizing  for  the  purpose  of  making 
their  wishes  respected  in  the  next  Legislature.  The  vote  in  the  last  Legisla- 
lature  showed  that  the  irrigationists  had  a  majority  of  its  members.  But  the 
riparianists,  owing  to  their  better  organization,  and  their  better  command  of 
parliamentary  filibustering,  succeeded  in  preventing  the  passage  of  proper  ir- 
rigation laws.  We  have  no  doubt  that  these  smart  obstructionists  thereby 
injured  California  more  than  can  easily  be  estimated.  The  representatives  of 
the  irrigationists  do  not  propose  that  there  shall  be  a  repitition  of  thig  per- 
formance if  timely  organization  can  prevent  it.  The  Committee  of  the  State 
Irrigation  Convention,  in  whose  hands  the  matter  was  left,  have  called  a 
meeting  of  the  Convention  in  San  Francisco  for  the  20th  of  next  month.  A 
stirring  address  to  the  people  of  California  has  been  issued,  in  which  the 
16 


240 


principles  and  objects  of  the  irrigationists  are  vigorously  set  forth,  and  which 
advises  the  early  formation  of  local  clubs  with  the  express  object  of  making 
the  water  question  a  vital  issue  in  the  election  of  members  of  the  next  Legis- 
lature. 

The  address  is  able,  and  makes  its  points  with  clearness  and  vigor.  Every 
disinterested  person  who  has  investigated  the  subject  and  is  capaple  of  form- 
ing an  opinion  upon  it,  will  agree  with  the  Committee  when  it  says:  "The 
English  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  ownership  is  repugnant  and  inap- 
plicable to  the  physical  conditions  of  this  State,  because  it  permits  no  use  of 
water  outside  the  banks  of  a  stream,  unless  by  assent  of  the  abutting  owner. 
The  streams  which  traverse  the  great  interior  valleys  have  their  heads  in  per- 
petual snow.  Riparian  ownership  denies  their  flow  to  the  thirsty  earth,  and 
condemns  it  to  evaporate  and  emission  in  the  thankless  sea.  *  *  *  Shall 
the  streams  be  legally  open  to  appropriation,  or  shall  the  law  of  riparian 
ownership  lock  the  water  within  the  banks?  Shall  the  flow  be  useful  or  use- 
less? The  intelligence  and  enterprise  of  the  State  have  already  answered 
these  questions:  'The  water  shall  be  for  irrigation.'  "  The  Committee  say 
"the  efforts  of  the  last  two  years  have  recruited  the  ranks  of  the  irrigators 
until  we  are  an  army."  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  army  will  prove  to  be  bet- 
ter disciplined  and  led  than  were  the  irrigation  forces  in  the  last  Legislature. 

This  address  advises  that  political  partisanship  be  subordinated  to  this 
great  question  in  the  next  election,  and  that  the  irrigationists  vote  for  no  can- 
didate for  legislative  honors  who  cannot  be  relied  upon  to  advance  the  desired 
legislation.  We  believe  an  overwhelming  majority  of  California  voters  are 
on  the  side  of  the  irrigationists,  and  that  the  irrigation  question  overshadows 
all  other  issues  in  importance  to  the  State.  We  hope  to  be  able  next  winter 
to  chronicle  a  different  result  from  that  which  was  reached  in  the  last  strug- 
gle on  this  momentous  question. 


Los  Angeles  Daily  Times. 

Anti-  Riparian. 

The  importance  of  prompt,  determined  and  decisive  action  in  the  war 
"which  the  people  of  the  State  are  called  upon  to  make  against  the  aggressive 
forces  of  riparianism  is  set  forth  in  the  address  to  the  members  of  the  River- 
side and  Fresno  Irrigation  Conventions,  which  we  publish  in  another  col- 
umn. It  is  a  strong  and  forcible  appeal  to  those  who  have  the  future 
interests  and  prosperity  of  this  great  State  at  heart.  The  picture  of  future 
desolation,  of  discouraged  and  decaying  industries  and  languishing  pursuits 
which  would  result,  were  riparianism  to  succeed,  is  not  a  pleasant  one  to 
contemplate.  Abundance  of  water  for  the  irrigation  of  our  vast  orchards 
and  vineyards  and  our  fruitful  acres  must  not  be  denied  us,  if  we  would  see 
the  industries  that  we  have  planted,  the  commerce  that  we  created,  continue 
in  success  and  prosperity,  and  also  make  beautiful  the  thousands  of  acres 
•tye  tnnoccupied  and  unimproved.  An  ample  supply  of  water  for  all  needed 
irrigation  will  assure  to  Southern  California  a  future  of  unlimited  pros- 


241 


perity  and  growth.  Without  it  the  opposite  condition  must  be  anticipate^. 
Oar  industries  must  languish,  and  immigration  in  this  direction  receive 
serious  check. 

Los  Angeles  County,  with  the  vast  interests  which  she  has  at  stake,  should 
not  be  backward  in  organizing  an  anti-riparian  association.  She  should  hold 
a  convention  in  which  every  anti-riparian  should  have  a  voice,  whatever  his 
political  faith  or  creed.  The  first  object  of  such  a  convention  of  the  people 
should  be  to  declare,  and  to  have  their  declaration  embodied  in  the  written 
laws  of  the  State,  that  superior  to  and  more  inalienable  than  the  right  of 
riparian  proprietors,  is  the  sovereign  right  of  the  people  of  the  State  to  use,, 
for  necessary  agricultural  purposes,  the  waters  of  our  streams  and  rivers. 
No  power  should  be  suflficient  to  lock  their  waters  within  their  banks  and 
withhold  them  from  the  thirsty  soil. 


Tulare  Register. 

Another  Irrigation  Convention* 

The  executive  committee  of  the  Fresno  Irrigation  Committee  of  last  year 
held  a  meeting  at  Fresno  Monday.  There  were  present  J.  DeBarth  Schorb, 
of  Los  Angeles;  Will  S.  Green,  of  Colusa;  R.  Hudnut,  of  Bakersfield;  L.  B. 
Ruggles,  of  Mussel  Slough;  D.  K.  Zumwalt,  of  Visalia;  E.H.Tucker,  of 
Selma;  J.  F.  Wharton  and  H.  S.  Dixon,  of  Fresno.  Mr.  L.  M.  Holt  is  ab- 
sent in  Chicago.  An  address  to  the  people  of  California  was  prepared,  and 
a  State  Irrigation  Convention  called  to  meet  at  San  Francisco  on  the  20th  of 
May. 

We  look  for  much  good  to  come  from  this  convention,  and  we  are  heartily 
glad  that  it  has  been  called  to  meet  at  San  Francisco.  The  city  by  the  Golden 
Gate  holds  the  political  scepter  in  this  State.  VVhatever  she  decides  to  do 
will  be  done.  If  the  San  Francisco  delegation  to  the  next  legislature  goes  in 
for  an  enlightened  system  of  irrigation  laws,  such  a  system  will  be  forthcom^ 
ing  next  winter.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  itch  that  ever  itches  and  never 
can  get  scratched  enough,  gets  into  the  palms  of  the  San  Francisco  legisla- 
tors, we  may  as  well  hang  our  harps  on  willow  limbs  and  cease  to  sing  of 
verdant  fields,  orchards  of  luscious  fruit,  of  the  raisin  and  of  wine. 

The  more  thoughtful  men  of  San  Francisco  now  realize  that  the  material 
prosperity  of  that  city  depends  as  much  upon  irrigation  as  do  the  business  in- 
terests of  the  towns  of  the  valley.  But  it  is  one  thing  to  see  a  truth  and  quite- 
another  to  act  upon  it.  It  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that  merchants,  bankers^ 
manufacturers  and  professional  men  should  Isnow  just  what  manner  of  irri- 
gation system  the  agricultural  sections  need.  This  the  irrigation  convention* 
and  the  press  of  the  city  must  teach  them.  But  even  that  is  not  enough.. 
The  local  politics  of  the  metropolis  are  in  such  a  state,  that  the  business  in- 
terests must  be  aroused  to  effective  action,  in  order  to  keep  political  sharps, 
from  making  every  needed  reform  a  tool  with  which  to  extort  money  fronk 
one  combatant  or  the  other.    The  convention  will  have  a  two-fold  purpose^ 


242 


to  enlighten  and  to  arouse  the  business  men  of  San  Francisco  upon  the  all 
important  subject  of  irrigation. 


San  Francisco  Chronicle. 

Tlie  Irrffi^ation  Q,uestion. 

It  would  seem  hardly  necessary  at  this  date  to  enlarge  upon  the  manifold 
benefits  to  be  secured  to  the  vast  interior  valleys  cf  California  from  the  con- 
struction of  extensive  and  intelligently  managed  systems  of  irrigation  canals. 
One  would  think  that  by  this  time  every  intelligent  person  would  have  be- 
come so  well  acquainted  with  the  principal  points  in  the  matter  that  no 
further  enlargement  thereon  would  be  necessary.  Judging  from  the  tone  of 
much  that  is  being  written  just  now  on  the  subject,  however,  there  must  be 
thousands  of  voters  and  many  newspaper  writers  who  have  yet  to  learn  the 
a  b  c's  of  the  irrigation  alphabet.  They  are  just  awakening  to  the  fact  that  in 
this  they  have  been  far  outstripped  by  sections  where  a  much  later  beginning 
was  made  in  the  matter,  and  that  while  in  such  a  comparatively  "new"  State 
as  Colorado  the  fundamental  laws  have  been  made  to  conform  with  the  de- 
mand for  the  use  of  streams  for  irrigation,  here  we  are  still  floundering  along 
in  the  slough  betwixt  the  doctrines  of  appropriation  and  riparian  rights,  with 
a  strong  leaning  towards  the  enforcement  of  the  latter. 

Lest  there  be  any  who  as  yet  have  not  learned  the  distinction  between  the 
two — and  it  is  evident  that  there  are  many  such — a  brief  statement  of  the 
points  involved  may  not  be  out  of  place.  The  old  Mexican  law  from  which 
our  statutes  regulating  the  right  of  appropriation  are  derived,  was  founded 
on  the  recognized  fact  that  the  waters  in  many  of  the  streams,  being  abso- 
lutely essential  to  the  successful  cultivation  of  the  soil  adjacent  thereto,  be- 
longed by  right  to  the  persons  so  making  use  thereof,  regardless  of  any 
assumed  riparian  rights  either  above  or  below  such  locations.  Under  these 
laws  the  first-comer  in  any  given  section  where  irrigation  was  necessary  had 
the  right  to  tap  a  stream  and  take  out  so  much  thereof  as  was  needful  for 
purposes  of  irrigation.  When  all  the  water  in  the  stream  was  thus  appro- 
priated there  was  nothing  left  for  the  new-comer,  though  he  might  purchase 
land  on  the  bank  of  the  stream,  but  to  buy  a  water  right  from  the  prior  appro. 
priatore.  Here  is  where  many  abuses  crept  in  and  where  some  regulation  by 
law  would  seem  to  be  called  for.  Under  the  easy-going  Mexican  system  there 
was  water  enough  and  to  spare,  and  no  one  thought  of  monopolizing  more 
than  he  had  use  for  to  the  exclusion  of  a  needy  neighbor. 

But  with  the  American  occupation  a  different  state  of  affairs  at  once 
prevailed.  With  that  unlovely  characteristic  so  often  met  with  here,  as 
elsewhere,  of  "wanting  everything  in  sight,"  the  first  comers  in  many  of 
those  sections  where  irrigation  was  found  to  be  necessary,  "took  up  "the 
natural  flow  of  the  streams  in  such  quantity  that  very  soon  none  was  left 
for  any  one  else,  and  this  regardless  oi  the  fact  that  it  was  impossible  for 
them  to  make  good  use  of  a  tenth  part  of  their  appropriation.    The  plan 


243 


adopted  was  for  a  dozen  or  more  of  settlers  to  claim  all  the  water  running  in 
a  given  stream  and  then  apportion  it  among  themselves  at  so  many  hours  or 
days  to  each  ranch.  This  gave  the  claimants  an  assumed  title  to  all  the 
waters  running,  whether  they  utilized  it  or  not,  and  effectually  cut  off  any 
outsider  from  participation  therein.  To  be  sure,  one  locating  on  the  stream 
below  the  original  appropriators  might  be  allowed  to  use  the  waste  water 
which  was  graciously  allowed  to  flow  down  after  all  had  been  used  that  the 
most  wasteful  manner  could  suggest,  but  he  was  liable  at  any  time  to  have 
such  precarious  supply  cut  off  by  the  sale  of  water  rights  above  him.  What 
right  one  man,  or  a  set  of  men,  had  to  claim  any  more  water  than  they  could 
possibly  utilize  on  their  land,  to  the  exclusion  of  others,  is  not  apparent, 
and  if  by  a  shadow  legal,  still  it  is  by  no  means  just.  Yet  that  is  the  way  in 
which  many  fortunes  have  been  made  in  this  State.  Men  have  for  years 
"claimed"  the  entire  flow  in  certain  streams,  though  not  utilizing  a  tenth 
part  of  it,  and  then  have  sold  such  claims  Jor  prices  as  high  as  $1,500  and 
$2,000  an  hour  for  a  portion  of  their  assumed  rights. 

Many  most  flagrant  instances  of  persecution  and  injustice  have  sprung  up 
under  this  system  of  allowing  a  man's  greed  to  be  the  only  gauge  by  which 
should  be  measured  the  amount  of  water  claimed  by  him.  This  is  where 
the  most  stringent  regulation  by  law  is  necessary,  and  while  it  is  now  a 
rather  late  day  to  talk  of  such  regulation,  it  is  nevertheless  necessary  in 
order  to  prevent  future  "hogging  "  operations  of  like  nature. 

The  riparian  doctrine,  which  is  the  exact  contrary  to  that  of  appropriation, 
is  based  on  the  old  English  common  law.  This  is  founded  on  the  customs 
and  necessities  of  a  country  where  irrigation  is  unnecessary  and  unknown 
and  where  running  streams  have  but  two  uses— navigation  and  furnishing  a 
means  of  power  for  mills,  etc.  Under  the  riparian  law  every  owner  of  land 
on  the  banks  of  a  stream  has  the  right  to  have  the  natural  flow  of  that  stream 
pass  by  his  door  undiminished  and  unchanged  in  either  quantity  or  quality 
by  any  one  above  him.  Under  this  law  the  owner  of  an  acre  of  ground  near 
the  mouth  of  a  river  has  the  same  right  as  the  owner  of  a  thousand  acres 
near  the  source.  He  who  takes  out  a  portion  of  the  stream  to  furnish  power 
for  a  mill  must  carefully  provide  for  the  return  of  that  water  to  the  parent 
stream.  The  enforcement  of  this  doctrine  is  seen  to  be  at  once  fatal  to  any 
system  of  irrigation,  since  water  so  applied  is  forever  lost  to  the  stream 
whence  it  is  tp,ken.  By  its  enforcement  no  one  but  the  owner  of  the  land  at 
the  mouth  of  the  water-course  could  by  right  divert  any  portion  upon  hia 
land.  In  the  first  settlement  of  the  State  the  water  of  many  streams  was 
conducted  by  ditches  to  a  considerable  distance  from  the  location  of  the 
original  river-bed,  and  in  some  instances  none  of  it  was  used  on  lands 
contiguous  thereto.  Under  the  riparian  doctrine  this  is  a  wrongful  diver- 
sion, and  none  of  the  original  claimants  have  a  right  to  the  use  of  the 
water.  What  hardship  the  enforcement  of  this  doctrine  would  work,  only 
those  familiar  with  the  affairs  in  the  irrigated  sections  of  the  State  fully 
know. 


244 


"The  riparian  doctrine  was  never  meant  to  apply  to  an  irrigating  country 
and  sooner  or  later  the  laws  of  California  mast  be  made  to  conform  to  the 
necessities  of  the  situation.  In  Colorado  this  was  long  since  recognized,  and 
tinder  their  intelligent  system  of  laws  on  water  rights,  that  State  is  having  a 
most  gratifying  growth. 

About  the  only  argument  that  is  urged  against  the  substitution  of  appro- 
priation for  riparian  rights  is  that  under  the  former  men  will  claim  large 
bodies  of  water  for  purposes  of  speculation,  and  that  immense  monopolies 
will  spring  up.  This  is  a  matter  for  after  consideration,  and  is  one  that  may 
be  very  easily  regulated  by  law  after  the  change  demanded  in  the  fundamen- 
tal laws  shall  have  been  made. 

The  establishment  of  irrigation  systems,  even  under  the  uncertain  status 
of  our  present  laws,  has  worked  a  transformation  in  many  localities,  but  by 
far  the  larger  part  of  the  State  is  still  undeveloped,  though  abundantly  sup- 
plied by  streams,  because  capitalists  are  loath  to  risk  their  money  where  a  ri- 
parian right  decision  is  Uable  to  checkmate  their  plans  at  any  time. 

The  objection  is  sometimes  met  that  by  the  adoption  of  extensive  irrigation 
systems  the  navigation  of  some  of  the  streams  will  be  injured  or  ruined. 
This  of  course  can  only  apply  to  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  rivers. 
Whether  this  is  a  danger  to  bo  feared  or  not,  an  example  in  the  southern  part 
of  the  State  may  show.  The  Santa  Ana  River,  which  traverses  the  counties 
of  San  Bernardino  and  Los  Aneieles,  is  one  of  the  principal  sources  of  supply 
for  irrigation  purposes,  many  of  the  most  thriving  colonies  deriving  their  en- 
tire sustenance  therefrom.  It  is  tapped  by  numerous  irrigation  ditches  at 
various  points,  and  here  a  singular  fact  exists.  Although  within  a  short  dis- 
tance of  the  point  where  it  debouches  upon  the  plains  from  its  mountain 
«ource,  every  drop  of  water  in  the  channel  is  diverted  into  a  number  of 
oanals,  and  the  bed  may  be  crossed  dryshod,  still  ten  or  twelve  miles  farther 
•down  there  is  again  an  abundance  of  water  flowing,  which  is  in  turn  diverted, 
a,nd  the  same  phenomenon  is  repeated  two  or  three  times  more  before  the 
sea  is  reached.  This  is  due  to  the  underground  flow  which  finds  its  way  to 
the  surface,  and  shows  on  a  small  scale  what  might  be  expected  were  a  num- 
ber of  large  ditches  taken  from  the  two  navigable  streams  mentioned. 
There  is  no  probability  that  it  would  in  any  way  affect  their  navigability  for 
the  worse,  and  even  if  did,  the  growth  of  the  section  traversed  by  those 
ditches  would  in  a  short  time  warrant  the  construction  of  railroads,  which 
would  quickly  replace  any  facilities  that  might  be  injured  by  the  use  of  the 
water  for  irrigation. 


San  Bernardino  Daily  Times. 

We  have  received  from  the  Irrigation  Committee  a  form  of  the  articles  of 
association,  by-laws,  and  pledge  for  anti-riparian  irrigation  clubs,  which 
though  drawn  in  highfalutin  language,  filled  with  buncombe  and  twaddle 
that  detract  from  its  strength,  nevertheless  presents  in  its  verbiage  some  facts 
which  are  of  direct   interest  to  the  whole  people  of  this  Coast,  and  es- 


245 


pecially  to  us  of  Southern  California,  to  whom  irrigating  water  is  life.  The 
application  of  the  common  law  of  England,  as  it  applies  to  water  courses,  to 
our  section,  where  the  conditions  are  so  opposite,  is  an  absurdity  of  law,  and 
a  foolish  observation  of  musty  precedent.  We  would  guarantee  that  English 
•courts  themselves,  in  their  colonies  where  the  conditions  are  different  to 
those  in  the  mother  country,  would  not  be  bound  by  rules  that  applied  to 
the  latter.  In  a  country  where  water  is  only  useful  for  manufacturiug  and 
navigation,  where  irrigation  is  never  dreamed  of,  the  rule  that  water  should 
not  be  diverted  from  a  stream  unless  it  was  returned  in  undiminished  quantity, 
is  correct.  But  in  Southern  California  where  the  streams  are  not  naviga- 
ble, where  the  water  is  not  used  for  manufactures,  where  it  has  either  got  to 
be  diverted  from  its  natural  channels  and  consumed,  or  the  country  be  an  un- 
inhabitable waste,  such  a  ruling  based  on  common  law  precedents,  is  an  ex- 
treme absurdity. 


Los  Angeles  Weekly  Mirror. 

Anti-Riparian. 

The  importance  of  prompt,  determined  and  decisive  action  in  the  war 
-which  the  people  of  the  State  are  called  upon  to  make  against  the  aggressive 
forces  of  riparianism  is  set  forth  in  the  address  to  the  members  of  the  River- 
side and  Fresno  Irrigation  Conventions,  which  we  publish  in  another  column . 
It  is  a  strong  and  forcible  appeal  to  those  who  have  the  future  interests  and 
prosperity  of  this  great  State  at  heart.  The  picture  of  future  desolation,  of  dis- 
couraged and  decaying  industries  and  languishing  pursuits  which  would  result, 
were  riparianism  to  succeed,  is  not  a  pleasant  one  to  contemplate.  Abundance 
€f  water  for  the  irrigation  of  our  vast  orchards  and  vineyards  and  our  fruitful 
acres  must  not  be  denied  us,  if  we  would  see  the  industries  that  we  have 
planted,  the  commerce  that  we  created  continue  in  success  and  prosperity, 
and  also  make  beautiful  the  thousands  of  acres  as  yet  unoccupied  and  unim- 
proved. An  ample  supply  of  water  for  all  needed  irrigation  will  assure  to 
Southern  California  a  future  of  unlimited  prosperity  and  growth.  Without 
it  the  opposite  condition  must  be  anticipated.  Our  industries  must  languish, 
and  immigration  in  this  direction  receive  serious  check. 

Los  Angeles  county,  with  the  vast  interests  which  she  has  at  stake,  should 
not  be  backward  in  organizing  an  anti-riparian  association.  She  should  hold 
a  convention  in  which  every  anti-riparian  should  have  a  voice,  whatever  his 
political  faith  or  creed.  The  first  object  of  such  a  convention  of  the  people 
should  be  to  declare,  and  to  have  their  declaration  embodied  in  the  written 
laws  of  the  State,  that  superior  to  and  more  inalienable  than  the  right  of 
riparian  proprietors,  is  the  sovereign  right  of  the  people  of  the  State  to  use, 
for  necessary  agricultural  purposes,  the  waters  of  our  streams  and  rivers.  No 
power  should  be  sufficient  to  lock  their  waters  within  their  banks  and  with- 
hold them  from  the  thirsty  soil. 


246 


Santa  Cruz  Daily  Sentinel. 

Irrigfation. 

The  believers  in  the  doctrine  that  the  waters  of  this  State  belong  to  those 
"who  will  appropriate  it  to  some  useful  purpose,  and  not  to  those  who  happen 
to  own  land  past  which  it  flows,  are  organizing  for  the  purpose  of  making 
their  wishes  respected  in  the  next  Legislature,  The  vote  in  the  last  Legisla- 
ture showed  that  the  irrigationists  had  a  majority  of  its  members.  But  the 
riparianists,  owing  to  their  better  organization,  and  their  better  command  of 
parliamentary  filibustering,  succeeded  in  preventing  the  passage  of  proper 
irrigation  laws.  We  have  no  doubt  that  these  smart  obstructionists  thereby 
injured  California  more  than  can  easily  be  estimated.  The  representatives 
of  the  irrigationists  do  not  propose  that  there  shall  be  a  repetition  of  this 
performance  if  timely  organization  can  prevent  it.  The  Committee  of  the 
State  Irrigation  Convention,  in  whose  hands  the  matter  was  left,  have  called 
a  meeting  of  the  Convention  in  San  Fiancisco  for  the  20th  of  next  month.  A 
stirring  address  to  the  people  of  California  has  been  issued,  in  which  the 
principles  and  objects  of  the  irrigationists  are  vigorously  set  forth^  and  which 
advises  the  early  formation  of  local  clubs  with  the  express  object  of  making 
the  water  question  a  vital  issue  in  the  election  of  members  of  the  next  Leg- 
islature. 

The  address  is  able,  and  makes  its  points  with  clear aess  and  vigor.  Every 
disinterested  person  who  has  investigated  the  subject  and  is  capable  of  form- 
ing an  opinion  upon  it,  will  agree  with  the  Committee  when  it  says:  "  The 
English  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  ownership  is  repugnant  and  inap- 
plicable to  the  physical  conditions  of  this  State,  because  it  permits  no  use  of 
water  outside  the  banks  of  a  stream,  unless  by  assent  of  the  abutting  owner. '^ 
The  streams  which  traverse  the  great  interior  valleys  have  their  heads  in  per- 
petual snow.  Riparian  ownership  denies  their  flow  to  the  thirsty  earth  and 
condemns  it  to  evaporate  and  emission  in  the  thankless  sea.  *  *  ^  Shall 
the  streams  be  legally  open  to  appropriation,  or  shall  the  law  of  riparian 
ownership  lock  the  water  within  the  banks?  Shall  the  flow  be  useful  or  use- 
less? The  intelligence  and  enterprise  of  the  State  have  already  answered 
these  questions:  '  The  water  shall  be  for  irrigation.'  "  The  Committee  say 
"the  efforts  of  the  last  two  years  have  recruited  the  ranks  of  the  irrigators 
until  we  are  an  army."  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  army  will  prove  to  be  bet- 
ter disciplined  and  led  than  were  the  irrigation  forces  in  the  last  Legislature. 

The  address  advises  that  political  partisanship  be  subordinated  to  this 
great  question  in  the  next  election,  and  that  the  irrigationists  vote  for  na 
candidate  for  legislative  honors  who  cannot  be  relied  upon  to  advance  the 
desired  legislation.  We  believe  an  overwhelming  majority  of  California 
voters  are  on  the  side  of  the  iirigationists,  and  that  the  irrigation  question 
overshadows  all  other  issues  in  importance  to  the  State.  We  hope  to  be  able 
next  winter  to  chronicle  a  diS'erent  result  from  that  which  was  reached  in  the 
last  struggle  on  this  momentous  question. 


247 


Martinez  Daily  Item.* 

The  Irrigation  Q,ne8tion. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Anti-Kiparian  Irri» 
gation  Association,  held  at  Fresno  on  Monday,  it  was  resolved  to  hold  a  con- 
vention at  San  Francisco  on  Thursday,  May  20th,  for  the  purpose  of  eflfect- 
ing  a  permanent  central  organization,  for  the  purpose  of  formulating  plans  to 
perfect  the  irrigation  laws  at  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  and  also  to 
lay  plans  for  action  during  the  coming  campaign.  This  question  will  enter 
largely  into  party  councils,  and  will  cause  no  little  discussion.  We  have  re- 
ceived  a  supply  of  documents  from  the  Committee,  and  shall  refer  to  the 
question  occasionally. 


Santa  Cruz  Daily  Sentinel. 

The  Irrififation  Convention. 

Santa  Cruz  should  be  represented  in  the  Irrigation  Convention  which  will 
meet  in  San  Francisco  on  the  20th  of  next  month.  The  object  of  the  con- 
vention is  to  organize  and  properly  direct  the  efforts  of  those  who  approve  of 
the  principles  of  the  irrigation  measures  introduced  in  the  last  Legislature. 
It  is  desi  ned  to  make  the  irrigation  question  a  controlling  issue  in  the  next 
State  election.  The  manifesto  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Fresno 
Convention  says:  "Through  this  organization  it  is  proposed  to  inform  both 
parties  that  we  know  no  politics  but  irrigation,  and  that  our  battlefield  is  on 
the  irrigable  plains  upon  which  the  future  of  California  is  to  be  exploited. "^ 
It  is  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  supreme  importance  of  this  irrigation  ques- 
tion to  our  State.  California  will  be  a  hobbling  cripple  if  the  riparian  doc» 
trine  prevails;  she  will  be  a  robust  giantess  of  unrivalled  powers  and  queenly 
mien  if  the  irrigation  doctrine  is  established.  That  doctrine  is  already  es- 
tablished in  the  will  of  a  vast  majority  of  our  people.  All  that  is  needed  is 
to  give  that  will  a  legal  form  and  direction.  This  is  the  object  of  the  pro- 
posed convention. 

The  position  of  the  Sentinel  on  this  great  question  is  well  known.  From 
the  beginning  of  the  agitation  we  have  repeatedly  and  earnestly  pleaded  for 
the  principles  contended  for  by  the  irrigationists.  Before  the  last  session  of 
the  Legislature  we  called  attention  to  the  legal  and  constitutional  principles 
underlying  the  ^iscussion,  and  advised  the  members  of  the  Legislature  to 
study  those  principles  before  they  went  to  Sacramento.  And  we  predicted 
that  unless  the  members  studied  the  question  for  themselves  beforehand,  they 
would  find  themselves  all  at  sea  and  involved  in  fogs  and  uncertainties  by 
the  legal  technicalities  of  the  riparianists  when  the  contest  came.  The  pre- 
diction was  amply  fulfilled.  The  dilatory  filibustering  tactics  that  defeated 
the  irrigation  measures  would  not  have  succeeded  had  it  not  been  for  sophis- 
tical appeals  based  on  alleged  injustice  to  the  riparianists — appeals  which 
were  baseless,  and  would  have  been  vain,  but  for  the  ignorance  of  the  prin* 
ciples  involved  in  the  discussion  on  the  part  of  those  members  who,  though 


248 


favorable  to  irrigation,  were  too  conscientious  to  inflict  a  possible  injustice  by- 
hasty  action.  When  at  length  the  light  of  reason  dissipated  the  fogs  of 
sophistry,  it  was  too  late  in  the  session  to  break  the  parliamentary  tangle  in 
which  the  bills  were  purposely  involved  by  their  enemies. 

Santa  Cruz  county,  owing  to  her  peculiar  topography  and  favorable  loca- 
tion, will  not  be  benefited  to  as  great  an  extent  as  most  other  counties  by  the 
proposed  irrigation  laws.  But,  if  she  would  reap  no  benefit  at  all  from  them» 
that  would  be  no  reason  why  she  should  not  do  all  she  can  to  further  the 
cause  for  irrigation.  Our  county  will  prosper  in  proportion  as  the  rest  of 
the  State  prospers.  Each  of  our  citizens  who  possesses  a  spark  of  State 
patriotism  takes  pride  in  the  general  advancement  of  California,  and  should 
he  ready  to  do  his  share  in  the  work  of  pushing  on  the  car  of  progress. 
Therefore,  our  county  should  send  representatives  to  the  San  Francisco  Con- 
vention next  month.  The  plan  proposed  by  the  committee  is  the  formation 
of  one  or  more  irrigation  clubs  in  each  county,  the  object  being  to  effect  the 
purposes  above  indicated.  These  clubs  will  send  delegates  to  the  convention, 
and  thus  every  locality  in  the  State  will  intelligently  co-operate  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  common  object,  by  carrying  the  irrigation  issue  vigorously 
into  the  next  general  election.  There  can  be  no  more  worthy  or  patriotic  act 
by  our  citizens  at  this  time  than  the  formation  of  an  irrigation  club. 


Tulare  County  Traver  Tidings. 

\iriiat  Will  Win- 

Of  the  meeting  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion, which  convened  at  Fresno  last  Monday  and  promulgated  an  address 
narrating  things  past  and  prophesying  much  good  to  come,  the  San  Francis- 
co ^Z<a  says:  lu  its  antitheses  may  be  read  the  certain  future  of  Califor- 
nia. If  our  laws  are  brought  into  harmony  with  oar  physical  conditions  and 
natural  necessities,  this  State  at  once  opens  her  acres  to  the  densest  and  most 
prosperous  population  in  the  world.  If  our  laws  remain  at  right  angles  to 
those  conditions  and  necessities  the  desert  now  untouched  remains 
bald  and  barren,  and  invades  the  green  oases  which  are  now  support- 
ing a  prosperous  people.  California  is  more  talked  and  thought  about  in  the 
East  now  than  when  she  shot  into  notice  and  notoriety  upon  the  discovery 
of  gold,  for  there  are  more  people  to  talk  and  think.  A  land  that  produces 
the-  orange,  grape,  almond  and  fig,  appeals  now  as  powerfully  to  the 
fancy  as  did  the  production  of  gold  thirty  years  ago.  The  agricultural  and 
horticultural  possibilities  of  a  winterless  country,  where  the  palm  waves  its 
branches  and  the  magnolia  blooms  the  year  through,  lure  and  allure,  and  con- 
jure with  greater  power  than  the  promises  of  gold  to  be  dug  from  the  hills. 
It  opens  up  the  prospe3t  of  a  redistribution  of  population.  It  promises  a  use. 
f  ul  drain  for  the  benefit  of  the  older  States,  that  leaves  within  them  better  op- 
portunities for  all  who  stay,  while  there  is  no  rule  by  which  to  measure  the 
certainties  offered  to  all  who  come  blessed  with  a  willing  spirit  and  ready  for 


249 


the  light  toil  which  wins  a  competency.  Now  is  California's  more  than  gol- 
den moment.  It  is  not  worth  while  to  dally  over  details.  Let  the  work  out- 
lined by  the  committee  go  forward  to  success,  and  the  processes  for  utilizing 
water  and  storing  it  for  irrigation  will  unfold  and  keep  pace  with  our  necessi- 
ties. 

A  good  system  of  irrigation  will  do  more  to  enhance  the  value  of  real  estate, 
says  the  Modesto  Republican,  and  give  larger  returns  in  fruits  and  cereals  than 
any  other  artificial  means  that  can  be  adopted.  This  year  crops  will  be  abund- 
dant,  for  the  reason  that  the  rains  have  been  plentiful,  which  is  all  the  evi- 
dence necessary  to  prove  to  the  farmer  that  he  needs  water  to  irrigate  his 
land  with.  There  are  plenty  of  small  fruit  and  vegetable  farmers  who  irri- 
gate by  means  of  windmills  and  artesian  wells.  They  find  it  profitable  be- 
cause they  are  enabled  to  raise  and  market  fruits  and  vegetables  every  season 
of  the  year,  and  with  our  soil  and  climate  millions  of  small,  comfortable 
and  happy  homes  can  be  made  in  California. 


Stockton  Independent. 

The  irrigation  counties  are  credited  with  about  33,000  votes.  The  irriga- 
tion issue  will  be  one  of  the  strongest  in  the  fall  campaign,  and  the  Republi- 
can Convention  will  be  called  upon  to  consider  it  as  affecting  vitally  the 
prospects  of  its  State  nominees.  The  fight  of  the  irrigators  has  justice  on  its 
side,  although  their  panicky  fear  of  disasters  to  follow  upon  a  possible  con- 
firmafion  of  riparian  laws  may  lead  them  into  occasional  exaggerations  of  the 
wrongs  sufi'ered  from  their  opponents.  Riparian  owners  are  not  to  be  thrust 
aside  without  just  regard  for  rights  they  have  acquired  under  legal  rulings  in 
this  State,  but  the  needs  of  the  majority  of  the  people  in  the  irrigation  coun- 
ties demand  that  the  law  shall  be  revised  and  riparian  rights  abridged.  The 
support  of  the  Republican  Convention  should  be  given  to  the  irrigators  by 
all  means. 


West  Oakland  Sentinel. 

Irri£'ation. 

No  more  important  ([question  has  ever  come  before  the  people  of  California 
than  that  which  relates  to  the  irrigation  of  arid  and  so-called  desert  land. 
These  lands,  which  lie  in  the  great  valleys,  comprise  a  large  portion  of  the 
State.  They  are  susceptible  of  the  highest  condition  of  cultivation  and,  with 
water,  are  perhaps  the  most  productive  on  the  continent.  The  question  is, 
shall  they  have  such  necessary  water? 

The  fact  that  the  running  streams  and  reservoirs  in  the  mountains  are 
capable  of.  supplying  this  essential  requirement  of  agriculture,  if  properly 
distributed,  is  unquestionable.  But  there  is  an  impediment,  constructive  or 
real,  to  the  utilization  of  this  water.  A  few  of  the  proprietors  of  lands  bor- 
dering on  the  streams  claim  that  under  the  English  common  law  doctrine  of 


250 


riparian  rights,  which  they  say  has  been  recognized  by  our  Supreme  Court, 
they  have  the  exclusive  use  of  the  water,  and  that  it  cannot  be  diverted, from 
its  natural  channel  for  any  purpose  whatever. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  the  riparian  proprietors  can  have  any  use  for  this 
natural  outflow  from  the  mountains.  Indeed,  their  right  to  use  water  flow- 
ing by  their  banks,  in  any  way  that  will  reduce  the  volume,  is  denied  under 
the  authority  of  the  same  common  law  doctrine.  It  must  simply  pass 
through  their  lands  on  its  way  to  the  sea,  to  be  lost  in  the  waste  of  waters, 
or  to  be  swallowed  up  in  the  tule  swamps.  Meanwhile  the  desert  lands,  so 
prolific  under  the  influence  of  irrigation,  are  dedicated  or  relegated  to  ste- 
rility. 

Shall  such  conditions  as  these  continue  to  exist?  Will  the  Legislature 
refuse  to  annul  the  application  of  the  common  law  by  a  declaratory  statute, 
and  give  the  thirsting  land  its  imperative  need  and  to  California  a  widely 
increasing  development  and  prolific  production?  Will  it  condemn  the  great 
valleys  to  barrenness?  This  is  the  issue  without  exaggeration  and  without 
coloring. 

Santa  Barbara  Daily  Independent. 

To  the  Anti-Riparian  Voters  of  California. 

The  Independent  cannot  give  space  to  the  long  address  of  the  Executive 
Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention.  It  is  not  a  matter  which 
greatly  concerns  this  section.  But  all  persons  interested  will  find  it  in  any 
of  the  principal  San  Francisco  dailies.  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  is  a  matter 
of  absorbing  interest  to  the  State  at  large,  if  not  especially  to  us.  The  Exam- 
iner comments  upon  the  address  as  follows:  "The  proposition  that  the  soil  of 
nine-tenths  of  the  State  cannot  be  cultivated  without  irrigation  is  too  obvious 
for  controversy,  and  that  there  is  water  enough  in  the  streams  which  can  be 
rendered  available  for  this  purpose  is  also  beyond  dispute.  That  every  com- 
mercial, agricultural  and  business  interest  that  we  have  already,  or  may  have 
in  the  future,  is  dependent  upon  the  lawful  diversion  of  the  water  from  the 
streams  is  also  obvious.  The  question  is,  shall  the  legislative  assistance 
needed  be  given?  The  people  have  it  in  their  power  to  accomplish  this  great 
necessity.  They  are  the  source  of  power,  the  tribunal  from  which  there  is  no 
appeal.  But  to  render  their  efi'orts  intelligent  and  efi'ective,  they  must  have 
a  specific  organization  and  definite  ends.  These  are  provided  for  in  the  ad- 
dress, and  the  plans  proposed  should  command  the  very  widest  possible  at- 
tention and  the  thoughtful  consideration  of  every  man  in  the  State.  Every 
one  is  interested  in  the  subject.  The  citizen  of  the  city,  equally  with  the  cit- 
izen of  the  country,  will  find  in  this  question  the  hinge  upon  which  the  future 
of  California  will  turn.  It  embraces  every  vital  interest,  every  hope  and  pros- 
pect of  the  future,  and  the  appeal  which  has  been  made  addresses  itself  to  the 
patriotism  of  the  individual  and  the  sense  of  right  of  the  public." 


251 

Marin  County  Tocsin, 

Irri£fation. 

The  subject  of  irrigation  is  a  living,  burning  issue  in  the  southern  counties 
of  California,  and  indeed  throughout  the  whole  State.  It  is  not  less  import- 
ant to  the  mercantile  and  manufacturing  interests  of  San  Francisco  than  to 
the  farmers,  fruit  growers  and  viueyardists.  Their  products  are  the  safe  basis 
of  our  wealth  and  prosperity.  If  the  thirsting  land  is  refused  water;  if  the 
waving  grain  fields,  the  umbrageous  orchards  and  the  vineyards  of  the  plains 
are  left  to  perish,  in  order  that  long  horned  Ciittle  may  wallow  in  the  swamps, 
our  merchants  and  local  manufacturers  will  soon  be  without  customers.  In- 
deed the  very  life  of  the  State  depends  upon  a  victory  for  irrigation. 

There  will  shortly  convene  in  San  Francisco  an  Irrigation  Convention.  It 
will  not  be  extravagant  to  say  that  the  future  of  California  for  prosperity  or 
poverty  will  be  determined  by  the  success  or  failure  of  the  movement  which 
this  convention  has  been  called  to  further. 

The  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  the  effect  that  water  can  not  be  law- 
fully appropriated  and  diverted  from  the  non-navigable  streams  for  the  useful 
and  necessary  purpose  of  irrigation,  must  not  become  the  settled  law  of  the 
State,  or  else  the  great  plains  and  valleys  must  be  abandoned.  The  rains  of 
heaven  which  belong  to  these  lands  are  precipitated  in  the  mountains,  and 
the  inhabitants  demand  the  right  to  recla'm  the  water  as  it  descends  in  the 
streams.  The  cattle  men  and  other  ripariauists  insist  that  the  water  is  not 
to  be  used.  The  mass  of  the  people  are  for  devoting  it  to  useful  purposes. 
We  will  see  who  is  the  most  powerful. 

This,  in  a  nut-shell,  is  the  signifi  ance  of  the  irrigation  movement.  Let  it 
be  distinctly  understood  by  all,  irrigation  means  prosperity,  riparianism 
means  a  parched  land  and  poverty. 


The  Resources  of  California. 

Let  ns  Have  Water— The  most  Important  Interegtg  of  the  State  In 
Dangler.  —Some  Facts  for  the  Consideration  of  the  People.  —Shall  oar 
Fertile  Lands  be  consi^rned  to  Eternal  Sterility?— The  Atrocious  Doc- 
trine  of  Riparian  Rin^hts. 

If  there  is  one  thing  in  which  the  people  of  the  State  of  California  are  in- 
terested more  than  another,  it  is  the  question  of  water  appropriation  vs.  ripa- 
rianism. Beside  this,  all  other  questions  dwindle  into  comparative  insignifi- 
cance The  wealth  and  prosperity  of  a  large  portion  of  our  State  is  involved 
in  this  question,  and  no  one  can  truthfully  deny  that  the  material  wealth  of 
California  would  be  greatly  multiplied  by  a  practical  system  of  irrigation. 
But,  barring  the  progress  to  this  much  desired  consummation,  stands  the 
bugbear  of  riparian  rights,  like  a  lion  in  the  pathway,  shutting  off  all  ad- 
vance, and  condemning  to  perpetual  sterility  millions  of  acres  of  the  most 
fertile  land  the  sun  ever  shone  upon,  while  the  water  which  would  render  it 


v/ 


252 


invaluable  runs  idly  and  uselessly  by  to  the  sea.  Such  a  condition  of 
things  is  not  and  cannot  be  right;  it  ought  to  be  clear  to  the  most  superficial 
observer  that  irrigation  will  bring  the  greatest  prosperity  and  result  in  the 
greatest  advantage  to  the  State.  Nature  has  provided  the  means  in  the  rivers 
and  streams  which  furnish  an  abundance  of  water,  were  it  properly  distribu- 
ted, to  irrigate  every  acre  of  arable  land  in  the  State.  The  counties  more 
particularly  interested  'in  this  question  are  Fresno,  Tulare,  Kern,  Merced, 
Mariposa,  San  Bernardino,  and  Los  Angeles;  but  every  county  in  the  State, 
from  Siskiyou  to  San  Diego  is  more  or  less  dependent  upon  irrigation  for  the 
cultivation  of  the  soil.  The  prosperity  and  growth  of  the  counties  named, 
depends  principally  upon  their  facilities  for  agricultural  pursuits.  In  order 
to  encourage  and  foster  these,  irrigation  is  absolutely  necessary;  indeed,  it 
is  the  one  thing  needful  to  continue  these  counties  in  their  present  path  of 
progress.  As  an  indication  of  that  progress,  we  will  instance  the  counties  of 
Fresno,  Tulare,  and  Kern.  Through  the  two  former  counties  runs  Kings 
Kiver.  In  1870,  less  than  one  thousand  acres  were  irrigated  artifically  from 
this  river.  In  1880,  there  were  about  sixty-five  thousand  acres,  and  in  1834, 
about  ninety-five  thousand  acres.  The  average  flow  of  water  in  Kings  River, 
during  the  irrigating  season,  if  properly  saved  and  distributed,  would  be 
more  than  sufficient  to  irrigate  five  hundred  thousand  acres  of  land,  at  the 
rate  which  is  now  found  sufficient  in  the  older  irrigated  parts  of  the  county. 
It  will  thus  be  seen  that,  by  proper  legislation,  regulating  the  distribution 
of  the  waters  of  this  river  alone,  it  is  capable  of  irrigating  six  times  the  area 
now  cultivated,  and  at  an  average  value  of  $100  per  acre,  would  give  an  ag- 
gregate value  to  these  lands  of  $55,000,000,  and  support  a  population  of  one 
hundred  and  thirty  thousand.  On  the  Kern  River,  which  runs  through 
Kern  County,  in  1867  less  than  one  thousand  acres  were  cultivated. 

In  1880  there  were  about  40,00  acres  under  cultivation,  and  in  1884  the 
area  of  cultivated  land  had  increased  to  about  50,000  acres.  This  increase 
occurred,  despite  a  continued,  harassing  litigation  on  the  part  of  riparian 
owners  against  the  appropriators  of  the  water.  This  litigation  has  retarded 
the  growth  of  the  county  and  prevented  the  investment  of  capital  and  the  im- 
provement of  lands.  The  lands  at  present  under  cultivation  form  but  a 
small  part  of  the  arable  lands  which  could  be  irrigated  by  a  proper  distribu- 
bntion  of  the  waters  of  the  Kern  river.  Land  in  Kern  county,  with  a  proper 
supply  of  water  for  irrigating  purposes,  is  worth  at  least  one  hundred  dollars 
per  acre,  which  would  amount  to  $30,000,000  for  the  lands  in  that  county 
which  are  susceptible  of  being  irrigated  by  the  waters  of  Kern  river.  Irri- 
gated districts  support,  at  a  low  average,  one  hundred  and  fifty  people  to  the 
square  mile.  As  there  would  be  about  460  square  miles  in  this  tract,  it 
would  support  a  population  of  70,000.  As  to  the  effect  of  irrigation  upon  the 
growth  and  prosperity  of  a  county,  we  may  cite  Los  Angeles  as  an  example: 
Lands  in  this  county  which  now  find  a  ready  sale  at  from  $100  to  $200  per 
acre,  in  an  unimproved  state,  could  not  have  been  disposed  of  at  $5  per  acre 
until  canals  and  irrigating  ditches  were  constructed  for  irrigating  them;  they 
"Were  comparatively  worthless  for  purposes  of  cultivation,  and  a  jack  rabbit 


253 


woald  have  found  it  difficult  to  obtain  a  subsistence  upon  them  during  the 
dry  season;  and  this  change  in  values  has  been  brought  about  solely  by  the 
introduction  of  water.  In  1879  some  57,000  acres  of  land  were  under  culti- 
vation and  irrigated  by  the  waters  from  natural  streams,  which  yielded  only 
4803/^  cubic  feet  per  second  during  the  irrigating  season,  which  gives  an  av- 
erage of  about  200  acres  to  each  cubic  foot  of  water  flowing  per  second  through 
the  irrigating  season.  Here  the  water  is  under  municipal  regulation,  and  is 
distributed  in  such  a  way  as  to  obtain  the  best  results  from  the  supply.  No 
one  is  permitted  to  waste;  each  person  takes  as  much  as  is  needed  and  no 
more.  No  miasma-breeding,  stagnant  pools  are  allowed  to  accumulate,  and 
the  argument,  so  often  used,  that  artificial  irrigation  engenders  malarial  dis- 
eases, is  refuted  by  the  report  of  a  well-known  and  skillful  physician,  for 
many  years  a  resident  of  Los  Angeles — Dr.  H.  S.  Orme — who,  after  a  careful 
and  thorough  investigation  of  the  subject,  gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  sys- 
tem of  irrigation  as  adopted  there  was  in  no  wise  detrimental  to  health.  The 
increase  in  the  acreage  cultivated  since  the  introduction  of  water,  the  en- 
hancement in  the  value  of  real  estate  and  the  wonderful  accession  of  popula- 
tion in  that  section  of  the  country  is  well  known  to  all. 

In  Kern,  Fresno  and  other  counties,  we  find  lands,  which,  before  irrigation 
was  resorted  to,  were  regarded  as  desert  lands,  inhabited  only  by  reptiles, 
and  considered  as  not  worth  the  Government  price  of  $1.25  per  acre,  now 
worth  all  the  way  from  $100  to  $250  per  acre.  The  reference  to  these  locali- 
ties is  quite  sufficient  to  show  and  establish  the  effect  of  irrigation,  and  that 
this  wonderful  increase  in  values  is  attrtbutable  solely  to  the  fact  that  the 
waters  were  diverted  from  their  natural  channels  and  poured  upon  the  land. 
Such,  then,  is  the  effect  of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  for  a  beneficial  pur- 
pose, as  contrasted  with  that  of  riparian  ownership.  The  former  condition 
of  the  country  was  not  due,  it  is  true,  to  riparian  doctrine  alone,  but  it  is 
nevertheless  certain,  that  under  riparian  law,  which  would  require  the  waters 
of  the  rivers  to  flow  in  their  natural  channels,  there  could  be  no  progress. 
The  residents  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley  and  Southern  California  are  now 
menaced  with  a  danger  which  may  well  cause  the  liveliest  alarm.  A  majority 
of  the  Supreme  Court  have  decided  that  the  English  common  law  doctrine  of 
riparian  rights  is  the  law  of  this  State.  The  court  has  in  effect  declared  that 
no  one  but  a  riparian  owner  can  touch  the  water  in  the  streams.  That  is  to 
say,  he  cannot  put  it  to  any  practical  use.  If  the  genius  of  recession  had  la- 
bored to  devise  a  plan  by  which  the  development  of  our  fair  State  might  be 
most  effectually  retarded,  he  could  have  hit  upon  nothing  more  likely  to  ac- 
complish his  object  than  this  abominable  doctrine  of  riparianism.  Here  ia 
an  agricultural  community,  blessed  with  a  soil  whose  fertility  and  produc- 
tiveness cannot  be  excelled;  with  a  climate,  equable  and  salubrious,  with  all 
the  conditions  necessary  to  health,  wealth  and  prosperity  fulfilled,  save  in 
the  one  fact,  that  the  clouds  of  heaven  do  not  dispense  their  aqueous  treas- 
ures in  sufficient  abundance  to  moisten  the  parceled  earth,  and  bring  forth 
the  fruits  and  flowers  and  grain  in  their  season.  Throughout  this  parched 
and  arid  region,  flow  rivers  and  streams,  whose  life-giving  waters  are  abund- 


/ 


254 


ant  to  make  the  desert  "blossom  as  the  rose;"  yet,  under  this  atrocious  law, 
not  a  drop  can  be  taken  from  the  streams,  except  by  one  whose  land  borders 
upon  its  banks,  and  the  poor  farmer  who  is  not  so  fortunate  as  to  possess  ri- 
parian rights,  must  sit  quietly  by  and  see  his  laud  parch,  his  crops  wither, 
his  cattle  die  of  starvation,  and  utter  ruin  stare  him  in  the  face,  while  the 
water  which  would  save  him,  runs  to  waste,  conferring  benefits  upon  no  one. 
Surely  such  a  state  of  affairs  cannot  long  continue.  Legislation  must  be  had, 
aud  a  contemptible  minority  must  not  again  be  allowed  to  defeat  the  will  of 
the  people  as  was  accomplished  in  the  last  Legislature. 

The  right  to  appropriate  the  waters  of  the  streams  for  purposes  of  irriga- 
tion, under  wise  and  judicious  restrictions  must  be  accorded;  this  right  is 
vital  to  the  interests  of  the  State.  It  is  no  local  issue;  the  merchants  and 
manufacturers  of  the  cities  and  towns  are  interested  as  well  as  the  agricultu- 
ralists; we  must  irrigate  to  produce,  we  must  produce  to  live.  Where  agri- 
culture is  crippled,  commerce  and  manufactures  decline.  No  State  can  afford 
to  have  a  vast  area  of  fertile  agricultural  land  shut  out  and  rendered  useless 
by  a  few  riparianists  who  agparently  would  sacrifice  the  best  interests  of  the 
State  to  ensure  their  own  pecuniary  aggrandizement.  A  State  Convention  is 
about  to  meet,  the  object  of  which  is  to  secure  united  action  on  the  part  of 
those  interested,  in  ensuring  legislative  action  which  will  protect  and  regu- 
late the  right  to  the  use  of  water  appropriated  for  purposes  of  irrigation.  To 
the  agriculturists,  the  vital  issue  of  the  coming  political  campaign,  is  appro- 
priation vs.  riparianism ;  all  other  considerations  are  secondary,  Let  the 
Convention  take  hold  of  this  matter  vigorously,  and  adopt  such  measures  as 
will  secure  a  united  and  determined  effort  at  the  polls  to  elect  to  ofl&ce  only 
those  who  are  absolutely  sound  on  this  important  question.  It  is  purely  a 
non-partisan  issue,  and  all  men  who  have  the  interest  of  the  State  at  heart, 
should  see  to  it  that  no  man  is  elected  to  office,  from  Governor  down,  who 
has  the  slightest  leaning  towards  the  pernicious  doctrine  of  riparian  rights; 
withdraw  support  from  every  man,  whatever  may  be  his  politics,  who  is  not 
an  outspoken,  unqualified  advocate  of  the  doctrine  of  appropriation. 

The  friends  of  irrigation  should  organize  at  once  in  every  portion  of  the 
State;  by  united  effort  they  can  win  the  battle;  disorganized,  they  are  power- 
less. The  result  in  the  last  Legislature  should  furnish  a  lesson  not  soon  to 
be  forgotten.  The  riparianists  are  few  in  number  but  powerful  in  their 
wealth.  Money,  we  all  know,  is  a  most  effective  weapon  in  politics,  and  this, 
without  doubt,  will  be  freely  used.  This  influence,  powerful  as  it  is,  can  be 
and  must  be  counteracted.  The  great  masses  of  the  people  in  the  large  cities 
and  towns  do  not  understand  the  merits  of  this  question;  they  must  be  in- 
structed. Agitate  the  matter  in  the  newspapers,  flood  the  State  with  circu- 
lars, explaining  the  nature  and  discussing  the  merits  of  the  case.  Let  speak- 
ers be  employed  to  address  the  people  during  the  campaign  and  spare  no 
effort  to  keep  the  question  before  them.  The  merchant  and  the  manufacturer 
cannot  fail  to  see  the  importance  of  developing  the  agricultural  resources  of 
the  great  San  Joaquin  valley  and  other  portions  of  the  State  by  irrigation. 
The  one  thing  needful  for  these  classes  is  an  active,  home  market  for  their 


255 


wares  and  products.  In  order  to  secure  this  we  must  have  population;  in. 
order  to  secure  population  we  must  offer  some  inducements  to  settlers.  Men 
will  not  come  to  California  to  settle  in  a  desert.  IShow  them  the  great  valley 
of  the  San  Joaquin,  parched  and  arid,  then  point  them  to  some  orchard  or 
vineyard  on  the  river  bank  and  tell  them,  by  irrigation  you  may  make  this 
apparent  desert  as  bright,  beautiful  and  productive  as  yonder  garden ;  and  the 
first  question  naturally  is:  how  are  we  to  obtain  the  water?  "Aye,  there's 
the  rub;"  the  land  is  fertile  and  productive,  the  water  is  close  at  hand,  the 
settler  may  look  upon  it,  Tantalus  like,  but  he  cannot  touch  one  drop  to 
moisten  the  parched  earth  and  make  it  smile  with  vegetation;  it  must  flow 
through  the  lauds  of  the  riparianist,  undiminished  in  quantity  or  quality,  and 
the  rich  and  fertile  lands  around  are  condemned  to  eternal  sterility.  The 
battle  between  the  irrigator  and  the  riparianist  must  be  fought  out  in  the 
Legislature.  There  the  laws  must  be  made  which  will  determine  the  correla- 
tive rights  of  owners  along  a  natural  water-way,  and  we  want,  and  must  have, 
a  Legislature  which  will  enact  laws  guaranteeing  the  greatest  good  to  the 
greatest  number.  This  done,  individual  enterprise  will  do  the  rest,  and  pro- 
vide irrigation  where  it  can  be  practically  and  successfully  used  for  the  far- 
mer's benefit,  and  open  up  to  cultivation  millions  of  acres  of  land,  which, 
under  riparian  rule,  would  remain  forever  uncultivated.  The  doctrine  of 
riparian  rights  must  be  stamped  out,  or  our  best  and  most  productive  lands 
must  be  relegated  to  the  desert;  to  the  occupancy  of  the  coyote,  the  jack  rab- 
bit and  the  rattlesnake. 


Alameda  Encinal. 

Irrigfatlon. 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Organization  has  called  a 
Convention  to  be  held  in  San  Francisco  on  the  20th  day  of  May,  and  re- 
quests that  clubs  be  organized  in  every  county  and  send  delegates.  The  pur- 
pose of  the  convention  will  be  to  perfect  a  central  organization  and  adopt  a 
line  of  policy  that  will  secure  proper  action  on  this  all-important  subject  by 
the  next  Legislature.  The  idea  is  a  good  one,  and  the  work  has  begun  none 
too  soon.  Sach  an  efi'ort  should  be  made  as  will  secure  to  our  farmers  their 
rights  in  the  application  of  our  water  ways  to  their  legitimate  use.  Both  of 
the  political  parties  should  appreciate  the  fact  that  our  husbandmen  are  alive 
to  the  protection  of  their  interests,  and  that  no  candidates  will  receive  their 
support  who  are  not  in  favor  of  reclaiming  the  large  area  of  desert  land  in 
the  State,  and  bringing  those  lands  lying  near  to  the  water  courses  to  that  de- 
gree of  cultivation  that  their  inherent  fertility  is  capable  of  reaching.  This 
is  one  of  the  most  important  issues  that  can  come  before  the  Legislature,  and 
the  efforts  of  the  friends  of  irrigation  should  receive  the  hearty  support  of 
both  the  press  and  the  people.  As  a  cotemporary  remarks,  "The  settlement 
of  the  irrigation  question  is  of  vital  importance  to  the  future  welfare  of  the 
State,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  appeal  of  the  Committee  will  receive  gen- 
eral attention  and  eventually  lead  to  a  reform  of  the  evils  which  now  exist." 
17 


256 
Vacaville  (Solano  County)  Judician. 

Among  all  the  questions  in  which  California  is  vitally  interested,  none 
equal  in  importance  Ihe  problem  presented  by  the  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  this  State,  by  which  irrigable  lands  of  the  interior  are  dominated 
and  made  subject  to  the  procrustean  processes  of  the  English  common  law 
doctrines  of  riparian  rights.  A  state  of  things  which  produced  the  English 
system  of  laws  cannot  be  found  in  California.  With  essentially  different 
conditions  here,  it  must  follow  that  the  Legislature  will  make  provision  by 
which  the  plains  possessed  by  the  cattle  king  may  be  bathed  in  the  crystal 
waters  of  the  Sierras,  and  hundreds  and  thousands  dwell  happily  when,  but 
for  its  benign  influences,  there  would  be  but  a  barren  range.  Here,  in  Vaca- 
ville, where  without  irrigation  the  grape  of  France,  the  olive  of  Spain,  the 
orange  of  Sicily,  aye,  and  the  date  palm  of  Egypt,  repay  lavishly  the  toil  of  hus- 
bandry, the  question  has  not  an  immediate  local  application;  but  our  concern 
in  it  is  by  no  means  less  than  in  the  counties  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley.  The 
interests  affected  are  so  great,  and  involve  consequences  so  momentous  in 
their  effects  on  the  future  progress  and  greatness  of  California,  that  the  mind 
becomes  dizzy  as  it  contemplates  the  vista  of  possibilities  which  reach  out 
before  this  State  when  once  a  wise  and  beneficent  Legislature  breaks  asunder 
the  shackles  imposed  on  her  by  the  narrow  rules  of  the  common  law,  and 
bids  her  revel  in  the  glorious  possibilities  of  her  nature.  The  problem  which 
will  come  before  the  next  Legislature  will  call  for  statesmanship  which  can 
contemplate  the  possibility  of  denying  to  the  otherwise  barren  plains  of  the 
San  Joaquin  a  population  as  teeming  as  ever  lived  on  the  banks  of  the  Nile. 
Population  is  what  this  State  needs  to  give  it  the  prestige  her  wealth  de- 
mands and  her  future  necessities  in  the  National  Congress.  The  party  which 
takes  up  this  question  and  makes  it  the  leading  one  of  the  next  political  cam- 
paign, will  deserve  well  of  California . 


The  Resources  of  California. 

Riparian  Communiain. 

The  attempt  to  establish  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  to  the  waters  of  the 
streams  of  California,  whose  climate  is  such  that  all  her  future  growth  is  de- 
pendent on  irrigation,  and  the  diversion  of  the  waters  from  their  channels 
upon  her  arid  plains,  is  as  abhorrent  to  every  principle  of  justice  and  right, 
law  and  order,  public  polic)^  and  private  equity,  as  is  the  attempt  of  the  fan- 
atics of  France,  Germany  and  Kussia  to  foist  upon  the  world  the  ideas  of 
communism,  socialism,  nihilism  and  anarchism.  Were  the  socialists  in 
power,  anarchy  would  reign  supreme;  no  rights  of  property  or  person  would 
be  sacred,  and  the  ruin  and  desolation  that  marked  the  horrors  of  the  com- 
mune of  Paris  would  become  widespread  and  general.  The  growth  of  such 
ideas,  within  the  past  few  centuries,  has  resulted  doubtless  from  the  laxity  of 
government,  or  diminution  of  despotism,  combined  with  ignorance.     That 


257 


state  of  society,  in  which  shall  prevail  among  all  its  memberp,  the  highest  in- 
telligence joined  with  the  greatest  independence  of  thought  and  action,  will 
render  the  prevalence  of  such  ideas  impossible.  We  have  not  as  yet  attained 
such  an  absolutely  Utopian  condition  in  the  United  States  or  in  California, 
and  it  is  still  necessary  for  us  to  combat  ideas  and  principles  whose  tendency 
is  to  revolutionize  society  and  establish  a  reign  of  anarchy. 

To  appreciate  the  force  and  application  of  this  remark  to  the  question  at 
issue,  let  any  one  visit  the  principal  irrigation  regions  of  the  State  and  see 
the  many  millions  of  dollars  invested  in  irrigation  canals  and  works,  the 
thriving  towns,  the  thousands  of  prosperous  homes,  the  vast  acreage  in  vine- 
yards, the  extensive  orchards,  the  unbounded  fields  of  alfalfa,  supporting 
thousands  of  cattle  and  sheep,  where  formerly  a  single  grasshopper  could  eke 
out  but  a  scanty  existence,  all  maintained  by  irrigation,  and  imagine  the  ruin 
that  must  follow  the  closing  of  the  canals  and  the  cessation  of  irrigation  by 
the  enforcement  upon  our  people  of  a  doctrine  of  law  which  declares  that  the 
waters  of  the  streams  must  be  allowed  to  flow  in  their  beds,  undiminished  in 
volume,  and  unutilized,  except  for  the  watering  of  live  stock  and  the  turning 
of  machinery.  There  are  a  few  favored  places  in  the  State  where  irrigation 
from  springs  and  artesian  wells  may  be  practiced  without  fear  of  interference 
from  the  riparian  doctrine,  but  they  are  as  a  drop  in  the  bucket  compared  to 
the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  irrigated  from  streams  on  which  it  is 
sought  to  enforce  the  riparian  principle,  and  the  millions  of  acres  that  are  yet 
to  be  irrigated  before  the  State  is  prepared  to  receive  the  dense  population 
she  is  capable  of  supporting.  That  the  people  of  this  State  are  to  accept  a 
doctrine  of  law  which  will  sweep  out  of  existence  the  greater  portion  of  the 
improvements  made  by  irrigation,  and  prevent  all  future  development  in  that 
direction  is  too  monstrous  for  belief.  It  is  on  a  par  with  anarchism,  for  it 
means  ruin  and  anarchy  to  the  secticms  now  dependent  for  life  upon  irriga- 
tion canals,  and  is  to  be  combatted  with  the  same  vigor  as  the  dangerous  doc- 
trines of  communism,  nihilism,  or  any  other  ism  where  tendency  is  to  throw 
all  organized  society  into  confusion  and  destroy  property. 


Fresno  Daily  Evening  Expositor. 

Another  Convert. 

• 

The  Bakersfield  Gazette  which  has  hitherto  been  counted  against  the  irri- 
gation interests,  has  come  out  squarely  against  riparianism,  and  is  now  in  a 
position  to  do  its  section  of  the  valley  much  good.  That  it  fully  compre- 
hends the  question  at  issue  is  demonstrated  in  a  recent  article  on  the  doc- 
trine of  riparianism.  It  says  that  the  so-called  advocates  of  riparianism  do 
not  urge  the  doctrine  because  they  believe  it  right,  but  because  they,  them- 
selves, desire  to  become  appropriators.     Pointedly  it  remarks: 

'•  The  truth  ia  that  the  riparian  rights  doctrine,  as  advocated  by  its  chief 
exponents  in  California,  is  used  by  them  as  a  cloak  for  the  monopolizing  of 
water  and  its  use  in  a  manner  totally  at  variance  with  the  principle  of  law, 


258 


under  which  they  seek  to  acquire  it.  The  people  should  begin  to  understand 
that  no  irrigation  is  possible  under  riparian  law,  and  that  those  who  advo- 
cate it  to  obtain  water  for  the  purposes  of  irrigation,  do  so  solely  to  trample 
upon  the  rights  of  those  who  have-forestalled  them  in  appropriating  the  water 
and  to  destroy  the  result  of  their  labor  and  capital,  expended  by  the  appro- 
priators  in  utilizing  the  water  in  cultivating  the  land,  and  in  establishing  thrifty 
homes  and  wealthy  irrigation  communities." 

The  Gazette  exactly  states  the  situation  and  the  people  should  be  shown 
the  true  animus  of  the  so-called  riparianists,  that  they  may  not  be  led  into 
giving  aid  and  comfort  to  them.  The  Anti-Kiparian  Irrigators'  Clubs  should 
take  particular  pains  to  show  up  this  phase  of  the  question.  There  is  no 
honesty  in  the  cry  of  the  riparianists.  Selfishness  is  at  the  bottom  of  their 
claim. 


The  Placer  Republican. 

The  irrigation  problem  is  looming  up  again,  and  promises  to  be  one  of  the 
foremost  questions  in  this  State  until  it  is  satisfactorily  settled. 


Press  and  Horticulturist. 

Irrigfation  Problem, 

The  Irrigation  Convention  at  Fresno  last  week  has  issued  an  address  to 
the  people,  which  we  print  entire,  as  there  is  not  a  word  too  much  in  it.  It  is 
a  plain  statement  of  facts  bearing  on  the  water  question  that  concerns  every 
citizen  of  this  State.  Our  future  progress  and  welfare  depend  upon  heeding 
the  warning  here  given.  If  our  lawQ  are  brought  into  harmony  with  the 
views  thus  expressed,  the  prosperity  of  our  State  is  assured,  and  millions  of 
acres  of  now  waste  and  barren  land  will  be  thrown  open  to  the  world  ;  but  if 
4he  riparian  law  is  allowed  to  rule,  the  growth  of  the  State  will  be  stunted 
^nd  its  fair  proportions  curtailed  ^of  much  of  its  beauty.  Thirty  years  ago 
Tihe  gold  fields  of  California  opened  up  to  the  world  unbounded  wealth  and 
*t)rought  to  this  hitherto  unknown  land  a  horde  of  men  whose  only  aim  was 
•not  to  produce  and  add  to  the  wealth  of  the  State,  but  to  carry  off  millions  of 
^treasure  to  other  lands,  leaving^^  nothing,  in  return.  The  gold  is  gone,  and 
most  of  those  who  disemboweled  the  earth  to  obtain  it  have  passed  away. 
The  land  now  offers  other  millions  to  the  new  comer  in  the  shape  of  the 
orange,  grape,  olive,  almond  and  fig— a  wealth  far  surpassing  all  its  former 
golden  trophies.  It  offers  him  a  land  of  perpetual  summer,  where  the  palm 
waves  its  branches,  the  magnolia  blooms,  and  nature  puts  on  its  most  gor- 
geous apparel  at  a  time  when  our  neighbors  at  the  East  are  shivering  with  the 
cold,  waiting  for  the  few  months  of  the  year  when  they  can  go  forth  and  till 
the  soil. 

When  they  come  here  they  are  confronted  by  the  law  of  the  riparianist, 
which  says  that  because  England,  a  century  ago,  did  thus  aud  so,  the  Califor- 


259 


nia  of  to-day  must  be  hampered  in  its  growth,  bound  down  by  the  iron  rule 
of  that  far-off  island.  There  no  irrigation  exists,  and  the  only  use  they  can 
put  the  streams  to  is  navigation  and  to  turn  their  mills.  Here  there  is  oom» 
paratively  no  navigation  and  but  few  mills,  but  irrigation  is  of  paramount 
importance,  and  we  should  as  soon  think  of  using  our  grandfather's  love- 
letters  to  do  our  courting  with  as  to  tie  ourselves  down  to  the  use  and  adop- 
tion of  such  a  law.  Every  stream  should  be  compelled  to  do  duty  in  making 
the  land  valuable;  every  canyon  that  can  be  dammed  to  hold  the  winter  rain 
and  melting  snow  should  be  made  into  an  immense  reservoir  for  the  same 
great  purpose,  until  every  drop  of  water  in  our  State  be  transmuted  into  lus- 
cious fruit  or  waving  grain,  to  bring  back  for  our  use  the  gold  we  so  freely- 
yielded  Tip  to  our  neighbors. 

It  is  strange  that  the  people  of  C  ilifornia  have  neglected  so  long  to  seo 
where  their  interest  lay  and  have  allowed  the  riparian  system  to  get  such  a 
foothold  on  our  coast,  when  it  should  have  been  made  the  foremost  issue  with 
all  political  parties,  or  rather  one  issue  above  all  others,  regardless  of  party 
and  politics.  It  is  no  mere  theory,  but  this  section  of  California  has  showD 
what  can  be  done  by  irrigation;  it  is  the  life-blood,  not  only  of  Southern 
California,  but  will  prove  the  same  of  nearly  every  portion  of  the  State.  The 
success  of  riparianism  means  a  retrograde  step  in  our  prosperity  and  discour- 
agement to  the  principal  industries  and  pursuits  of  the  State.  Thousands  of 
people  from  the  East  are  turning  their  eyes  and  thoughts  to  this  fruit  eldora- 
do,  and  when  they  come  they  must  find  righteous  and  beneficent  laws  to 
assist  them  in  building  up  their  future  homes. 

The  address  from  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Irrigation  Convention  is 
timely  and  right  to  the  point.  Prompt,  determined  and  decisive  action  is 
needed.  The  people  must  organize  at  once,  irrespective  of  party,  so  as  to 
demand  the  nomination  of  men  for  the  coming  Legislature  who  are  known  to 
V^e  in  accord  with  the  interests  of  the  people  on  this  question.  Let  the  dif- 
ferent political  parties  know  all  over  the  State  that  to  secure  support  they 
must  nominate  only  such  men  as  will  command  the  support  of 'the  irrigation- 
ists.  The  people  should  demand  of  all  candidates  coming  before  them  for 
their  suffrage,  that  there  should  be  embodied  in  the  written  laws  of  the  State 
the  inalienable  and  sovereign  right  of  the  people  of  the  State  to  use,  for  agri- 
cultural and  horticultural  purposes,  the  waters  of  our  streams  and  rivers,  and 
that  any  attempt  to  keep  such  water  from  its  legitimate  use  of  cheering  the 
thirsty  soil,  should  be  severely  punished.  Every  section  of  the  State  should 
proceed  to  organize  at  once  to  carry  on  the  good  work  and  see  that  the  right 
men  are  sent  to  represent  them,  and  require  such  men  to  give  pledges  that 
they  will  make  irrigation  their  first  concern;  that  they  will  not  allow  the  irri- 
gation bills  before  the  next  Legislature  to  be  set  aside  and  delayed  by  other 
measures;  that  they  will  stand  by  them  firm  as  a  rock  till  they  become  laws. 
With  such  action  on  the  part  of  the  people  they  cannot  help  but  succeed. 


260 


The  Placer  Republican. 

Irrig'ation. 

The  people  of  the  valleys,  and  of  Southern  California  in  particular,  have 
begun  the  usual  agitation  of  the  irrigation  problem.  The  subject  is  equally 
interesting  here  and  almost  as  vital  to  our  interests  as  it  is  to  those  of  any 
other  section.  The  State  Committee  having  in  charge  what  is  called  the 
Fresno  plan,  has  issued  an  address  to  the  friends  of  irrigation  and  called  a 
convention  to  meet  in  San  Francisco  on  the  20th  of  May.  It  should  not  be 
understood  that  the  words,  "  Fresno  plan,"  are  applied  to  a  system  peculiarly 
adapted  to  advancing  the  interests  of  Fresno  aloue.  They  are  used  because 
an  important  convention  to  consider  the  subject  happened  to  be  held  at  that 
place  in  November,  1884.  It  might  with  more  justice  be  called  the  common 
sense  plan,  because  the  material  interests  of  the  State  depend  largely  on 
adopting  the  principles  there  declared  as  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  riparian 
rights. 

The  principle  contended  for  by  the  irrigationists  may  be  briefly  stated  to 
be,  that  all  water  shall  be  utilized  for  the  good  of  the  greatest  possible  num- 
ber, instead  of  being  allowed  to  flow  uselessly  to  the  sea  at  the  whim  of  those 
who  own  the  land  along  its  channels.  According  to  our  present  law  the  com- 
mon law  of  England  is  the  rule  of  the  decision  in  all  the  Courts  of  the  State. 
In  England  riparian  rights  are  as  sacred  as  the  throne;  but  the  law  of  Eng- 
land was  made  for  England,  a  land  of  landlords  and  boundless  estates,  where 
the  necessities  of  irrigation  beyond  what  can  be  accomplished  with  a  water- 
ing-pot are  unknown.  We  can  leave  to  lawyers  the  task  of  discoursing  on 
the  desirability  of  conforming  to  the  English  law  in  general,  but  to  make  the 
English  system  of  water  rights  the  rule  in  a  climate  like  this  is  not  common 
sense.  It  would  show  better  judgment  to  adopt  the  '•  common  law"  of 
Asia,  It  would  indicate  more  common  sense  to  follow  the  usage  of  the  Spanish 
colonies,  which  made  the  use  of  water  a  public  use.  Our  own  Constitution 
declares  that  "the  use  of  all  water  now  appropriated,  or  that  may  hereafter 
be  appropriated  for  sale,  rental  or  distribution,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  a 
public  use,  and  subject  to  the  regulation  and  control  of  the  State,  in  the  man- 
ner to  be  prescribed  by  law."  To  adopt  the  English  rule  in  the  face  of  this 
provision  seems  like  the  extreme  of  absurdity.  There  can  be  no  such  thing 
as  ownership  of  running  water.  It  is  on  one  man's  land  one  minute  and  on 
another's  the  next.  It  is  the  means  given  by  nature  to  reclaim  thousands  of 
acres  of  otherwise  barren  land.  The  right  to  use  it  should  not  be  confined 
to  a  few,  nor  should  a  few  have  it  in  their  power  to  say  that  it  shall  run  to 
waste  unused. 

It  is  said  that  the  plans  of  the  irrigationists  will  destroy  the  internal  navi- 
gation of  the  State.  Few  believe  that,  but  if  it  does,  the  latter  interest  will 
bear  no  comparison  with  the  good  that  will  result  from  wise  irrigation  laws. 
A  very  small  percentage  indeed  of  the  produce  of  the  State  goes  to  market  by 
water.  People  do  not  travel  much  by  water,  and  the  importance  of  naviga- 
tion on  three  hundred  miles  of  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  rivers  is  as 


261 


nothing  compared  with  the  prosperity  of  all  the  valleys,  plains  and  foothills 
from  Shasta  to  Lower  California. 

The  irrigationists  propose  to  carry  this  contest  into  the  campaign  this  fall 
regardless  of  party,  and  candidates  for  office  will  have  to  trim  their  sails  to 
navigate  this  dry  land  question.     We  hope  to  see  the  irrigationists  win. 


Modesto  Herald. 

Th.e  Irrigation  Q,aegtion. 

Eventually  California  will  be  irrigated  from  the  north  end  of  the  Sacramento 
valley  to  the  extreme  southern  part  of  San  Diego.  There  need  be  no  fears  as 
to  that.  The  demand  for  just  such  products  as  require  irrigation  will  compel 
this  work.  During  the  past  three  months  over  100,000  people  from  the  East- 
ern States  have  visited  California  with  the  intention  of  buying  homes  and 
engaging  in  the  culture  of  fruits,  raisins  and  wines.  They  have  become  con- 
vinced that  there  is  a  market  for  all  that  California  can  produce,  and  they 
come  well  informed  on  the  subject.  They  have  in  view  the  culture  of  the 
orange  and  lemon  as  well.  They  have  witnessed  the  enthusiasm  with  which 
California  fruits  of  all  kinds  have  been  received  in  the  Eastern  cities,  and 
particularly  California  wines,  which  they  consider  more  pure  and  wholesome 
than  any  foreign  product  that  finds  its  way  to  our  shores.  They  have  not 
large  fortunes  to  spend  for  small  farms,  but  they  have  the  enterprise  and  the 
muscle  to  carry  them  forward  to  success.  The  cut  rates  in  railroad  fares  and 
freights  have  been  a  god-send  to  California.  More  people  are  in  San  Francisco 
to-day,  and  have  been  each  day  for  the  past  month,  than  were  present  during 
the  conclave.  Hundreds  are  turned  away  from  the  prominent  hotels  every 
evening,  and  every  lodging  house  in  the  city  is  full.  These  are  not  tramps 
and  adventurers.  They  are  men  of  enterprise  and  means  who  have  a  desire 
to  locate  in  this  State,  and  now  is  the  opportunity  for  this  State  to  secure  an 
increased  population  of  hardy  husbandmen.  That  is  the  character  of  the 
people  who  are  coming  to-day. 

Kern  County  Californian. 

A  Misapprehension. 

We  observe  that  there  are  some  papers  in  the  State  that,  while  disposed  to 
be  friendly  to  the  cause  of  irrigation,  misapprehend  the  meaning  of  the  doc- 
trine or  law  of  appropriation.  They  take  it  to  mean  that  whoever  diverts 
water  from  a  stream  becomes  the  owner  of  that  water,  to  do  with  it  as  he 
pleases,  thus  having  it  in  his  power,  by  running  it  to  waste,  to  bring  about 
as  much  injury  as  an  end  man,  provided  the  opposite,  or  riparian  doctrine  is 
confirmed  and  made  the  law  of  the  State.  But  nothing  is  further  from  the 
fact.  The  appropriator  is  entitled  to  the  water  he  diverts,  so  long  only  as  he 
applies  it  to  a  beneficial  use.  For  example,  after  he  has  irrigated  his  crop, 
he  no  longer  has  right  to   the  water.     It  then  becomes  common  property 


262 


until  he  again  requires  it  for  that  purpose.  It  must  be  returned  to  the  chan- 
nel to  be  taken  up  by  the  ditches  and  canals  of  other  appropriators,  to  be  used 
in  like  manner.  This  is  the  law  of  all  countries  where  irrigation  is  recog- 
nized, encouraged  and  protected  by  law,  aud  the  preferred  use  of  water  is  for 
that  purpose.  For  this  reason,  in  all  such  countries,  streams  used  for  irriga- 
tion are  under  police  control — under  an  authority  that  promptly  and  arbitra- 
rily decides  all  questions  respecting  diversions  from  them;  complaints  of 
waste  and  misuse  of  the  precious  fluid  being  those  which  most  frequently 
come  under  such  cognizance.  To  establish  this  necessary  police  control  in 
all  the  irrigated  districts  of  the  State,  and  especially  to  prevent  appropria- 
tors from  continuing  control  over  their  diversions  of  water  after  they  had 
ceased  to  need  it,  and  waste  it  as  they  would  then  necessarily  do,  was 
the  purpose  of  one  of  the  bills  before  the  Legislature  at  the  late  session.  It 
expressly  provided  that  no  appropriator  could  take  any  more  water,  or  for  a 
longer  time,  than  his  needs  required.  Its  purpose  was  to  provide  for  the 
economical  use  of  water,  and  to  extend  its  benefits  to  the  greatest  number 
possible.  To  this  end,  and  to  carry  out  other  purposes  that  long  experience 
had  proved  essential — all  looking  to  the  economical  use  of  water  and  divert- 
ing it  to  the  greatest  good  of  the  greatest  number,  and  reducing  the  cost  of 
conveyance  to  the  minimum,  the  bill  proposed  to  create  certain  officers  to 
bear  all  complaints  relating  to  water,  redress  wrongs,  and  work  generally  for 
the  interests  of  those  within  the  irrigating  system  they  controlled,  according 
to  forms  and  processes  prescribed. 


Daily  Examiner. 

Irrig^ation  and  tlie  Lavr. 

In  the  economy  of  modern  civilization,  under  democratic  representative 
governments,  all  popular  and  political  "movements,"  so  called,  are  simply 
efforts  of  the  people  to  bring  the  law  into  harmony  with  their  righls  and  in- 
terests. It  is  difficult  to  change  the  laws.  They  are  crystallizations,  so  to 
speak,  of  past  customs  and  opinions,  and  are  often  thickly  incrusted  with 
prejudices  and  fortified  with  established  interests  that  antagonize  the  just  de- 
mands of  the  masses.  Hence  it  is  that  it  frequently  happens,  even  in  the 
most  free  countriep,  that  the  changes  in  the  law  demanded  by  the  people  can 
only  be  effected  by  popular  uprisings  that  would  amount  to  revolutions  un- 
der monarchial  and  less  pliant  forms  of  governmont. 

This  idea  finds  an  apt  illustration  in  the  contention  now  goirig  on  in  our 
State  over  the  question  of  water  for  irrigation.  The  masses  of  the  people  un- 
derstand clearly  that  their  future  material  prosperity  depends  in  an  eminent 
degree  upon  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of  a  thorough  system  of  irri- 
gation for  the  arid  plains  which  stretch  for  hundreds  of  miles  along  the  great 
valley  of  California.  Much  the  greater  part  of  the  arable  land  of  the  State  is 
not  sufficiently  watered  by  the  annual  rainfall  and  the  riparian  acreage  is  a 
small  fraction  of  the  whole.     And  yet  many  millions  of  acres   of  land  in  the 


&63 


vast  basin,  which  are  naturally  too  arid  for  vegetation,  are  susceptible  of  the 
highest  cultivation  when  irrigated.  This  is  known,  as  we  say,  to  the  people. 
And  they  know,  too,  that  it  is  the  universal  custom,  and,  therefore,  the  com- 
mon law  of  all  dry  countries,  that  the  water  in  running  streams  is  public 
property  and  subject  to  appropriation  and  diversion  for  the  necessary  pur- 
pose of  irrigation. 

The  first  immigrants  who  came  to  California  from  the  States  beyond  the 
mountains  found  such  customary  law  among  the  few  Spanish-Mexican  inhab- 
itants of  mission  lands  and  grants.  The  Americans  adapted  themselves  to 
the  physical  condition  of  the  country  and  to  the  laws  and  customs  in  that  re- 
gard imposed  thereby.  Hundreds  of  thousands  of  fortune-hunters  came. 
Gold  mines  first  attracted  them,  but  these  becoming  rapidly  exhausted,  they 
turned  their  attention  to  the  soil,  so  rich  and  productive.  The  marvellous 
growth  of  the  new  State  proceeded,  and  visions  of  imperial  greatness  began 
to  arise  in  the  imaginations  of  the  people. 

But  being  Americans  of  English  origin,  we  brought  with  our  language  and 
with  our  grand  principles  of  liberty  and  justice,  the  body  of  the  common  law 
of  England.  By  statutory  enactment  we  made  this  the  rule  of  decision  in  our 
Courts,  except  where  changed  or  modified  by  the  Constitution  and  laws  of 
the  United  States  and  of  the  State.  And  now  we  are  told  by  a  few  lawyers, 
speaking  for  a  few  clients  who  own  the  banks  of  some  of  the  streams,  that  it 
is  unlawful  to  divert  water  from  running  streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating 
the  land.  Such  was  the  law  of  England — of  humid,  saturated,  fog  enshroud- 
ed England — and  is  therefore  the  law  of  California. 

Neither  space  nor  patience  will  permit  our  discussing  the  proposition.  It 
rather  merits  denunciation  and  derision.  And  indeed  the  irrigation  move- 
ment now  rapidly  progressing  throughout  this  State  is  too  likely  to  partake 
of  these  characteristics. 

There  is  no  doubt  whatever  of  the  result  of  this  movement.  It  will  effect- 
ively bring  the  laws  of  California,  in  respect  of  water  rights,  into  full  harmo- 
ny with  the  rights  and  interests  of  the  people.  Hereafter  it  will  be  entirely 
lawful,  as  well  as  absolutely  necessary,  to  irrigate. 


Kern  County  Californian. 

The  Supreme  Court  and  Irrifgation. 

The  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  California  in  the  now  celebrated 
irrigation  case,  cannot  be  too  often  noticed.  Not  that  the  people  are  partic- 
ularly interested  in  the  parties  to  the  suit,  nor  in  the  decision,  so  far  as  it 
merely  relates  to  the  immediate  litigants.  The  plaintiffs  are  swamp  land 
proprietors  and  cattle  kings,  and  the  defendants  are  extensive  ranchers  and 
canal  owners.  The  public  care  nothing  about  their  individual  interests  and 
quarrels.  But  when  the  highest  judicial  tribunal  in  the  State,  in  assuming  to 
settle  a  private  controversy,  takes  the  occasion  to  announce  a  rule  of  law  for 
other  cases — a  rule  of  public  law,  which  is  calculated,  in   its  far-reaching 


264 


effects,  to  destroy  half  the  wealth  of  the  State  and  to  throttle  the  agricultural 
interests  of  the  people,  then  the  individual  interests  of  the  parties  to  the  suit 
sink  into  insignificance  and  the  power  of  the  Court  for  evil  becomes  a  matter 
of  public  concern. 

Until  the  decision  in  this  water  case  was  rendered,  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  of  California  had  never  doubted  that  the  water  which  flows  down  from 
our  mountain  ranges  into  the  great  valleys,  mostly  in  non-navigable  streams, 
might  be  diverted  and  appropriated  for  irrigation.  This  had  been  done  in  all 
arid  and  comparatively  rainless  countries  throughout  the  whole  world  from 
the  earliest  ages.  Several  hundred  millions  of  the  population  of  the  world 
have  subsisted  for  time,  whereof  the  memory  of  man  runneth  not  to  the  con- 
trary, upon  products  raised  upon  irrigated  land.  American  pioneers  came  to 
California.  They  came  from  the  saturated  valleys  and  dripping  hillsides  of 
the  East.  They  found  a  great  arid  and  seemingly  desert  region.  But  they 
soon  discovered  that  the  great  valley  of  California  could  sustain  a  population 
of  fifteen  or  twenty  million  souls  if  the  soil  could  be  watered  and  the  luxuri- 
ant vegetation  started.  They  began  to  irrigate,  as  other  people  had  done  in 
other  arid  lands.  Witness  the  marvellous  results!  Immense  grain  fields, 
extensive  vineyards,  innumerable  orchards,  thousands  of  lovely  and  happy 
homes,  where  but  yesterday  the  grasslesa  plains  knew  only  the  cayote  and 
the  prairie  dog. 

But  suddenly,  and  entirely  unexpectedly,  comes  the  announcement  from 
the  highest  Court  of  the  State  that  all  this  is  against  the  law !  The  water 
must  not  be  taken  from  the  beds  of  the  streams;  it  must  be  allowed  to  "flow 
unvexed  to  the  sea"  (swamp),  because,  forsooth,  the  common  law  of  England 
is  the  rule  of  decision  in  our  courts,  and,  according  to  the  common  law  of 
England,  every  owner  of  any  portion  of  the  banks  of  a  stream  had  the  right 
to  have  all  the  water  flow  past  him. 

It  is  not  our  purpose,  now,  to  argue  against  the  absurdity  of  this  conclu- 
sion. Perhaps  it  would  be  better  to  say  against  the  wrongness  of  this  con- 
clusion. It  is  enough  to  say  that  it  is  wrong,  because  it  will  work  immeas- 
urable injury  to  the  State  and  incalculable  injustice  to  the  people. 

It  is  not  necessary  that  we  should  assert  nor  that  any  one  should  suppose 
that  the  Judges  of  our  Supreme  Court  were  actuated  or  controlled  by  any  but 
the  purest  motives.  "We  concede  that  they  are  above  reproach.  They  have 
simply  blundered,  perhaps.  In  that  case,  since  the  question  is  one  of  public 
concern,  let  the  representatives  of  the  people  correct  the  blunder.  Or  it  may 
be  that  the  fault  is  with  the  letter  of  the  law,  although  frankly,  we  think  not. 
If  that  is  so,  change  the  law.  Law  must  serve  the  public  good  and  not  in- 
justice; it  is  not  to  destroy  but  to  subserve  and  conserve. 

The  remedy  is  with  the  people.  In  the  end  they  have  the  power  to  make 
all  law,  whether  it  be  legislation  proper  or  Judge  made.  The  general  election 
is  approaching.  A  new  Legislature  is  to  be  chosen.  Other  Judges  are  to  be 
elected.     Let  the  people  speak  their  will. 

While  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  propriety  of  early  action,  we  find 
contrary  to  what  we  feared,  that  there  is,  likewise,  no  word  of  disapproval  of 


265 


their  course  in  calling  the  next  meeting  of  the  convention  at  San  Francisco, 
insleadfcf  at  one  of  the  large  towns  or  cities  of  the  southern  part  of  the 
State.  The  press  and  people  have  been  more  quick  to  see  than  we  imagined 
they  could  be  that  San  Francisco,  as  the  metropolis,  and  because  of  its  rela- 
tion to  the  great  central  valleys,  the  development  of  which  will  give  the  local 
population,  it  must  have  to  become  one  of  the  great  leading  cities  of  the 
world,  like  New  York  or  London,  is  more  deeply  interested  in  wiping  out 
all  suspicion  of  riparian  law  from  our  legal  system  and  the  enactment  of 
proper  irrigation  legislation  than  any  part  of  the  State.  From  that  point 
all  work  in  this  direction  should  receive  its  main  impetus  and  come  as  from 
some  great  controling  center.  With  irrigation  protected  and  promoted  in 
this  State,  as  it  is  in  every  other  part  of  the  earth  where  the  same  climatic 
conditions  prevail,  the  great  interior  valleys,  that  convey  toward  San  Fran- 
cisco in  our  narrow  commercial  channel  would  have  a  prosperous  population 
of  ten  or  twelve  millions  of  people,  within  a  period  short  even  in  relation  to 
a  lifetime,  and  the  city  be  sustained  by  the  largest  contiguous  population 
and  resources  of  any  in  the  world.  No  city  ever  became  great  through  the 
possession  alone  of  a  fine  harbor  and  an  extensive  trade  in  transit.  In  addi- 
tion to  this,  it  must  be  the  trade,  financial  and  manufacturing  center  of  a 
large  population.  San  Francisco  has  been  slow  to  realize  this;  but  it  has 
done  so  at  last.  The  press  of  that  city  are  now  the  most  earnest  champions 
of  the  irrigation  interests,  and  from  its  merchants,  business  men,  property 
owners  and  capitalists  will  come  the  most  strenuous  representations  in  favor 
of  necessary  legislation  to  the  next  Legislature. 

Accordingly  the  committee  have  established  their  headquarters  at  San  Fran- 
cisco, in  the  Merchants'  Exchange,  and  from  that  point  will  labor  strenuously 
to  enlighten  and  influence  public  opinion  in  every  part  of  the  State  in  relation 
to  the  great  work  they  have  in  hand — of  such  vital  importance  to  San  Fran- 
cisco and  the  entire  State.  The  opposition  they  have  to  contend  with  is  the 
most  contemptible  and  unworthy,  considered  in  itself,  that  could  be  imag- 
ined. As  far  as  it  showed  itself  at  the  late  session  of  the  Legislature,  it 
consisted  only  of  five  or  six  cattle  men — former  opponents  of  the  no  fence 
law — and  owners  of  swamp  lands  at  the  ends,  or  sinks  of  the  streams  of  the 
Tulare  valley,  to  which  they  obtained  title  because  the  water  was  taken  away 
and  they  were  made  dry.  But  these  men  are  powerful  because  of  their 
wealth,  their  close  alliance  ^d  the  harmony  with  which  they  work  together. 
In  these  days,  the  justice  of  a  cause,  while  a  powerful  support,  is  by  no 
means  sure  of  sustaining  itself  against  corrupt  influences.  These  men  with, 
out  a  wrong  to  complain  of — in  face  of  a  proposed  provision  of  law  to  pay  them 
for  the  infringement  of  any  right  or  loss  they  might  sustain  through  the  use  of 
the  water  of  the  streams  aforesaid  for  irrigation— were  yet  able  to  make  a 
winning  fight,  taking  their  stand  on  the  allegation  that  such  and  such  was 
law,  that  being  so,  it  must  stand  superior  to  the  interests  of  civilization  and 
to  the  welfare  of  the  State,  and  that  the  interests  of  several  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  people  were  of  no  moment  if  they  collided  with  any  alleged 
lawful  right  of  theirs.     But  as  was  exemplified  in  the  case  of  the  no  fence 


266 


law,  against  which  these  men,  or  those  they  represent,  long  waged  a  suc- 
cessful contest,  the  committee  believe  that  right  and  justice  will  pr^ail  in 
the  end.  They,  or  men  equally  persistent  and  determined,  will  continue  the 
fight  until  the  resources  of  their  opponents  are  exhausted — until,  if  neces- 
sary, their  swamp  lands  represent  to  them  values  equal  to  lots  along  the  great 
business  thoroughfares  of  London. 


Oakland  Morning  Times. 

The  irrigation  problem  is  being  unravelled  in  such  a  way  that  the  next  leg- 
islature cannot  fail  to  consider  it  favorably.  The  whole  country  is  waking 
up  to  the  fact  that  we  must  have  our  river  water  properly  distributed  in  the 
large  valleys  or  give  the  land  up  to  cattle  ranchers,  who  will  forever  keep  it 
in  a  desert  state  with  but  a  few  shanties  here  and  there.  The  only  objection 
that  has  been  made  to  the  irrigation  scheme  so  far,  is  that  it  will  injure  our 
navigable  streafns.  This  is  simply  bosh,  for  the  reason  that  the  water  will 
soon  be  returned  to  its  channel.  It  is  a  well-known  fact  among  irrigators, 
that  after  a  few  years  the  land  irrigated  becomes  so  saturated  that  but  a  very 
little  water  is  needed,  and  the  ditches  have  to  be  used  only  once  or  twice  dur- 
ing the  year.  Around  Fresno  the  land  for  miles  back  from  the  ditches  is  so 
saturated  that  one  good  flooding  at  the  proper  time  will  guarantee  a  fine  crop, 
whereas  when  the  di'ches  were  first  brought  into  the  valley  they  had  to  keep 
them  full  all  summer.  The  riparian  rights'  men  will  spring  all  kinds  of 
traps  for  the  unthinking  lawmakers  between  now  and  the  next  session;  hence 
the  friends  of  prosperity  will  have  to  be  wide  awake  all  the  time,  and  work 
like  beavers  until  their  bill  passes  both  houses  and  is  signed  by  the  Governor. 


Kern  County  Californian. 

TKe  Irrigation.  Issue, 

A  considerable  part  of  our  space  last  week  was  devoted  to  the  work  of  the 
Executive  Committee  of  tlie  State  Irrigation  Convention,  which  convened  at 
Fresno  on  the  5th  inst.  They  have  not  only  outlined  a  vigorous  course  of 
action,  but  have  taken  the  field  early.  One  of  the  mistakes  of  the  Irrigation 
Convention  was,  that  its  last  session  at  Fresno  did  not  take  place  early 
enough,  and  when  it  adjourned  the  Executive  Committee  appointed  by  it  to 
carry  into  effect  its  views  had  less  than  three  weeks  to  prepare  before  the 
session  of  the  Legislature  commenced.  Their  bills  should  have  been  the 
first  presented  in  both  Houses,  as  they  doubtless  would  have  been  if  the 
committee  had  been  given  three  months  for  preliminary  preparation  instead 
of  the  totally  inadequate  period  that  remained  to  them  between  the  adjourn- 
ment of  the  convention  and  the  meeting  of  the  Legislature.  As  it  was,  not- 
withstanding the  unavoidable  delay  in  the  preparation  of  the  bills,  their  im, 
perfections  consequent  upon  hasty  work,  the  deadlock  and  the  mistakes 
made  because  of  the  impossibility  of  due  deliberation  on  all  the  steps  that 


267 


were  taken,  they  came  very  near  to  the  successful  accomplishment  of  all  they 
had  in  charge  to  do.  Their  bills  passed  the  Assembly  by  majorities  of  more 
than  two-thirds,  and  would  have  passed  the  Senate  by  large  majorities  except 
for  the  obstructive  tactics  of  a  few  Senators  who  considered  themselves  at- 
torneys for  the  five  or  six  end  men  of  the  streams  of  the  Tulare  Valley,  and  as 
such,  forgetting  that  they  had  duties  to  perform  as  legislators,  devoted  all 
their  time,  ingenuity  and  pettifogging  skill  to  the  work.  The  committee  will 
render  an  account  of  their  stewardship  to  the  State  Convention  which,  pur- 
suant to  their  powers,  they  have  called^  together  in  San  Francisco  on  the 
20th  proximo,  and  whether  tney  are  continued  in  place  or  their  succssors 
appointed,  time  at  least  for  the  accomplishment  of  what  the  irrigation  inter- 
ests of  the  State  require  will  not  be  wanting — time,  the  want  of  which  was  so 
disastrously  felt  before. 


The  Contra  Costa  Argus. 

Tlie  Irrigation  Q,ue8tion. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Legislative  Committee  of  the  State  Anti-Riparian  Irri- 
gation Association,  held  at  Fresno  on  Mondav,  it  was  resolved  to  hold  a  con- 
vention at  San  Francisco  on  Thursday,  May  20th,  for  the  purpose  of  effect- 
ing a  permanent  central  organization  for  the  purpose  of  formulating  plans 
to  perfect  the  irrigation  laws  at  the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  and  also  to 
lay  plans  for  action  during  the  coming  campaign.  This  question  will  enter 
largely  into  party  councils,  and  will  cause  no  little  discussion.  We  have 
received  a  supply  of  documents  from  the  committee,  and  shall  refer  to  the 
qaestion  occasionally. 


Daily  Alta  California, 

Th  absurdity  of  attempting  to  apply  the  modern  English  doctrine  of  "ri- 
parian rights,"  in  its  full  extent,  to  the  streams,  and  alleged  streams,  of  Cali- 
fornia has  often  been  pointed  out.  In  England  it  is  quite  possible  for  every 
stream  to  be  utilized  to  the  utmost  without  having  its  natural  flow  substan- 
tially impeded  or  diminished  from  its  source  to  the  sea.  Aside  from  domestic 
use,  and  from  the  fertility  imparted  by  the  stream  to  the  adjacent  land,  the 
principal  private  benefit  to  be  derived  from  a  water-course  there,  is  that  it  is 
a  source  of  power  for  mechanical  purposes.  It  is  right  enough,  too,  that  this 
benefit  should  be  appropriated  wholly  to  the  use  of  those  through  whose  lands 
the  stream  runs.  If  it  were  diverted  from  its  natural  channel  it  could  not, 
ordinarily,  be  devoted  to  a  more  extended  or  beneficial  use.  Irrigation  by  arti- 
ificial  methods  is  not,  in  that  country,  a  necessity  or  even  a  benefit.  The 
streams  are  so  plentiful  and  the  atmosphere  so  humid,  that  it  is  impossible 
for  any  tract  of  land  to  be  deprived  of  necessary  moisture;  in  fact  there  is 
everywhere  a  surplus  of  moisture.  Hence  the  doctrine  that  every  owner  of 
land  upon  a  water-course  is  entitled  to  have  the  water  flow  in  its  natural 


268 


channel  through  or  past  his  land  without  substantial  hindrance  or  diminu- 
tion is  there  manifestly,  just  and  appropriate,  and  injures  no  one. 

But  in  California  it  is  far  otherwise.  Here  the  rule  is  that  the  streams  are 
more  useful  when  direrted  than  when  confined  to  their  natural  channels. 
Irrigation  is  here  one  of  the  principal  and  most  important  uses  of  a  water- 
course. There  are  vast  tracts  of  land  lying  at  a  distance  from  any  natural 
streams  which,  by  artificial  irrigation,  may  be  converted  into  vineyards, 
groves  and  gardens  of  surpassing  richness  and  bewildering  bloom,  but  which, 
without  such  aid,  must  remain  mere  arid  wastes.  Besides  this,  many  of  the 
streams,  while  confined  to  the  tracts  through  which  they  run,  if  they  may  be 
said  to  run  at  all,  so  sink  beneath  the  surface  of  the  ground  or  run  so  far 
below  the  surface  of  the  adjacent  ground,  that  even  the  riparian  owners  can- 
not use  them  for  irrigation  and  restore  them  to  their  channels  before  leaving 
their  own  lands.  If  the  modern  English  common  law  is  to  prevail  here, 
therefore,  the  value  of  these  streams  can  never  be  realized,  and  large  areas  of 
the  most  valuable  lands  in  the  State  must  remain  uncultivated. 


There  is  no  rule  or  reason,  nor,  as  we  think,  of  law,  which  is  said  to  be 
"  the  perfection  of  reason,"  justifying  the  application  to  such  a  condition  of 
things  as  we  have  here  of  the  churlish  doctrine  that  the  owner  of  land  bor- 
dering upon  a  stream  may,  without  employing  its  waters  for  any  useful  pur- 
pose himself,  insist  upon  keeping  them  in  their  channel,  while  his  neighbor's 
thirsty  fields  parch  and  blister  in  the  sun,  and  are  condemned  to  hopeless 
sterility.  The  obviously  just  and  reasonable  rule  with  respect  to  property  in 
water  to  be  applied  here  is  the  rule  already  sanctioned  by  the  immemorial 
practice  of  our  people,  by  numerous  judicial  decisions  both  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  and  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  this  State,  and  by 
express  statute  law,  the  distinctively  California  rule  of"  priority  of  appropri- 
ation." The  rightful  owner  of  the  water  of  a  stream,  where  streams  are  so 
few,  and  those  who  need  to  use  them  are  so  many,  is  in  natural  justice  he  who 
by  his  energy  and  enterprise  first  appropriates  it  to  some  beneficial  purpose, 
to  the  extent  that  he  does  so  appropriate  it.  Water  has  been  describe!  as  a 
*•  wandering  thing,"  and  therefore,  like  the  air,  incapable  of  ownership  apart 
from  the  soil  upon  which  it  rests  or  runs,  but  certainly  if  there  can  be  any 
property  in  it,  he  should  be  deemed  its  owner  who  first  captures  the  wanderer 
and  tames  it  to  be  his  servant.  There  is  no  more  reason  why  the  owner  of 
land  over  which  a  stream  runs  should  own  the  stream,  without  making  any 
use  of  it,  so  as  to  prevent  another  from  appropriating  it  before  it  reaches  his 
land,  than  there  is  why  he  should  own  the  wild  animals  that  roam  through 
bis  forests  or  the  free  birds  that  perch  upon  their  branches. 

There  is  no  hardship  in  this  rule  of  prior  appropriation.  It  leaves  the  ripa- 
rian  owner  every  reasonable  right  and  privilege.  He  may  make  the  water  in 
the  stream  coursing  through  his  land  his  own  by  using  it;  and  he  has  a  bet- 
ter opportunity  than  any  one  else  to  make  the  appropriation,  because  the 
water  is  already  on  his  land.  He  has  but  to  stoop  and  take  it.  Any  compet- 
itor with  him  for  its  use  is  compelled  to  turn  it  into  a  channel  and  carry  it 


269 


many  miles,  perhaps,  to  reach  the  laud,  at  an  expenditure  of  much  time, 
labor  and  money.  The  riparian  owner,  therefore,  has,  by  his  position  upon 
the  stream,  every  advantage  over  his  neighbors  which  he  can  justly  claim, 
and  if  he  suffers  himself  to  be  outstripped  in  the  race  for  priority,  it  can  only 
be  by  his  own  want  of  dilij^ence  and  enterprise.  If  he  sits  and  dreams  upon 
his  bank  until  another  has  appropriated  the  water  he  has  only  himself  to 
blame. 

The  inapplicability  of  the  English  doctrine  to  most  of  the  so-called  water- 
courses in  California,  and  the  justice  of  the  rule  of  prior  appropriation  as 
respects  them,  are  further  manifest  when  we  come  to  consider  that  they  are 
not  in  fact  watercourses  at  all,  with  "  bed,  banks  and  water,"  as  required  by 
the  definitions  in  the  books.  The  water  confines  itself  for  a  short  distance 
only  to  some  semblance  of  a  defined  channel,  and  as  soon  as  it  leaves  the 
mountains  and  reaches  the  plains,  it  spreads  itself  out  over  the  land  into  a 
mere  marsh,  standing  here  and  there  in  sluggish,  brackish  pools,  unfit  for 
any  use,  or  loses  itself  entirely  in  the  porous  soil,  to  reappear  at  some  dis- 
tant point,  with  nothing  to  mark  its  course  between.  It  has  a  general  slow 
tendency  seaward,  which  can  scarcely  be  dignified  with  the  name  of  "cur- 
rent." Indeed,  it  has  none  of  the  characteristics  of  those  well-defined 
streams  to  which  the  English  doctrine  was  meant  to  be  applied.  These 
pretended  watercourses  in  California  are  utterly  incapable  of  any  beneficial 
use,  except  to  nourish  a  few  coarse  marsh  grasses  until  they  have  been  gath- 
ered into  defined  channels  and  distributed  to  points  where  they  are  needed 
by  the  labor  of  man.  They  become  useful  by  artificial  means,  and  justice 
demands  that  he  who,  by  his  money  and  labor,  makes  them  beneficial,  should 
own  their  waters. 

It  is  a  notable  and  significant  fact  that  most  of  the  stoutest  champions  of 
riparian  rights  in  California  are  claimants  under  the  Swamp  Land  Act.  This 
is  notably  so  in  Fresno,  Tulare  and  Kern  counties.  These  people  bought 
their  lands  as  mere  swamps;  but  now  they  claim  them  to  be  watercourses, 
and  that  they  are  riparian  owners.  They  undertook,  when  they  purchased, 
as  a  part  of  the  consideration  of  the  purchase,  to  drain  their  lands  of  their 
sluggish,  miasma-breeding  waters;  but  now  they  claim  that  they  have  a  right  to 
keep  them  forever  as  they  are,  and  not  only  not  to  drain  them  themselves,  but 
to  prevent  others  from  doiDg  so.  That  this  is  a  breach  of  faith  which  ought 
not  to  be  tolerated  by  the  people  of  California  goes  without  saying.  The 
purpose  of  the  swamp  land  legislation  of  the  Federal  and  State  Governments 
was  a  wise  and  beneficent  one.  If  that  purpose  were  faithfully  carried  out, 
it  would  add  immensely  to  the  productive  area  of  California  soil.  It  would 
convert  these  pestilential  bog-pastures  into  fruitful  fields.  And,  besides,  the 
collection  of  these  stagnant  waters  in  ditches  and  canals  would  furnish  the 
means  of  irrigating  countless  acres  of  desert  lands  and  of  making  them 
valuable.  It  may  be  true  that  the  owners  of  these  bogs  find  it  more  profita- 
ble not  to  drain  them,  but  it  was  not  for  Iheir  profit  that  drainage  was  re- 
quired. In  selling  the  lands  to  them,  it  was  not  left  to  their  option  to  drain 
them  or  not.     They  bound  themselves  by  their  contracts  to  drain  them,  and 


270 


the  good  of  the  whole  State  requires  that  they  should  fulfill  their  contract. 
At  all  events,  they  have  no  right  to  object  to  others  draining  their  swamps 
for  them  for  the  purpose  of  using  the  water  upon  other  lands.  The  ludi- 
crous pretense  of  riparian  ownership  by  these  swamp  land  purchasers,  who 
have  thus  deliberately  broken  the  contracts  under  which  thoy  purchased, 
ought  not  to  be  permitted  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the  prosperity  of  the  State. 
We  need  the  lands  which  are  left  to  lie  waste  by  the  surly  greed  of  these  pur- 
chasers, for  homes  for  the  new  population  now  flocking  to  the  State,  and  in 
order  to  irrigate  those  lands  and  bring  them  into  cultivation,  we  must  have 
the  surplus  water  which  now  goes  to  fill  these  swamps,  whether  the  bog- 
owners  like  it  or  not. 


Oakland  Morning  Times. 

The  irrigation  boom  is  getting  under  headway  once  more.  The  oflBcers  of 
the  last  Irrigation  Convention  will  meet  in  a  few  days  at  Fresno,  and  a  call 
will  be  issued  for  a  convention  to  take  place  very  soon.  They  will  proba- 
bly decide  on  meeting  in  Oakland,  as  one  of  the  head  men  was  in  this  city  a 
few  days  ago,  and  seemed  to  be  anxious  to  have  the  Appropriators  come 
here.  If  the  gentlemen  wish  to  educate  the  prospective  law  makers  of  this 
part  of  the  State,  we  don't  know  of  a  better  place  for  them  to  meet  than  in 
Oakland.  It  is  near  the  centre  of  the  State,  and  besides,  the  people  of  Oak- 
land and  San  Francisco  are  very  anxious  to  be  enlightened  on  the  question  of 
irrigating  the  San  Joaquin  valley.  Let  us  have  the  convention  here  by  all 
means.  We  will  guarantee  to  make  it  the  biggest  success  of  the  kind  ever 
held  in  California. 


Kern  County  Galifornian. 

Navigfation  and  Riparianism. 

The  riparian  poll-parrot  at  Sacramento  is  screaming  to  save  the  navigation 
of  the  Sacramento  river,  falsely  asserting  that  unless  the  riparian  law  is  sus- 
tained, river  navigation  will  be  destroyed. 

The  navigability  of  the  rivers  is  protected  by  a  diflferent  principle  of  law. 
Riparian  rights  have  not  the  remotest  relation  to  navigation.  Navigable  riv- 
ers are  public  highways  of  commerce,  the  obstruction  of  which  is  a  public 
nuisance.  A  riparian  owner  has  no  higher  right  than  any  individual  of  the 
community  in  maintaining  navigable  waters. 


Oakland  Morning  Times. 

Every  Man. 

The  Secretary  of  State  Bayard  says  that  the  growth  and  exports  of  wheat 
from  India  during  the  past  few  years  has  been  wonderful,  and  he  anticipates 
great  damage  to  the  industry  in  this  country  from  that  quarter.    This  is  no 


271 


more  than  what  the  people  of  California  might  have  expected  since  it  was 
learned  that  two  crops  of  wheat  can  be  raised  yearly  in  India,  and  the  yield 
per  acre  is  about  three  times  greater  than  it  is  here,  and  the  cost  of  seeding 
and  harvesting  fully  a  half  less.  If  this  be  true,  and  we  have  no  reason  to 
doubt  its  truthfulness,  for  Mr.  Bayard  can  be  relied  upon  on  such  matters, 
then  it  is  high  time  for  the  people  of  the  United  States,  and  California  espe- 
cially, to  cast  about  them  for  some  other  use  to  put  their  land  to.  Ever  since 
California  was  settled,  a  majority  of  its  people  have  held  to  the  belief  that 
our  rich  valley  lands  cannot  be  used  for  anything  except  the  production  of 
cereals.  They  have  fallen  into  this  way  of  thinking  on  account  of  the  scarcity 
of  water  and  the  uncertainty  of  the  rainy  season.  We  can  very  distinctly  re- 
member the  time  when  it  was  firmly  believed  that  the  great  San  Joaquin  val- 
ley would  not  even  produce  grain,  but  it  is  a  well-known  fact  now]that  almost 
anything  will  grow  on  the  once  arid  plains,  if  an  abundance  of  water  is  fur- 
nished. Under  such  circumstances  we  are  in  a  condition  to  let  India  raise  as 
much  wheat  as  she  pleases,  and  we  will  furnish  the  world  with  fruit  and 
wines.  There  is  "no  money"  in  the  production  of  cereals,  and  there  never 
will  be  again,  so  we  must  turn  our  attention  to  a  more  pleasant  and  profitable 
business.  We  have  the  only  country  in  the  world  that  will  yield  fruits  of  all 
kinds  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  and  with  such  great  advantages  on  our  side 
there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  furnish  the  entire  globe  with  fruits  and 
wines  that  never  could  have  been  produced  except  in  the  Garden  of  Eden. 
But  before  this  state  of  affairs  is  brought  about  we  must  settle  the  irrigation 
question.  There  must  be  a  plenty  of  water  and  that  water  must  come  from 
the  numerous  waterways  of  our  great  valleys,  in  spite  of  the  big  cattle  kings. 
We  cannot  depend  on  wheat  in  the  future,  therefore  we  must  have  irrigation 
and  fruit,  and  it  is  the  duty  of  every  man  in  the  State  who  is  not  a  cattle 
king  to  join  the  appropriators  and  see  that  the  next  Legislature  does  its  duty 
in  this  matter. 


Oakland  Enquirer. 

The  Irrigation  Qaestion, 

For  many  years  past  the  irrigators  of  the  State,  men  who  have  capital  in- 
vested in  land  and  water-rights,  have  been  striving  to  get  recognition  before 
the  Legislature.  They  want  to  have  the  irrigation  interest  placed  on  such  a 
permanent  basis  that  those  who  buy  irrigated  or  irrigable  land  may  do  so . 
with  the  assurance  that  their  rights  to  water  are  as  fixed  and  tangible  as  their 
title  to  the  land.  Owners  of  dry  land,  not  yet  irrigated,  do  not  want  to  un- 
dertake large  investments  in  the  line  of  irrigation  canals,  until  the  question 
of  riparianism  is  settled.  They  do  not  wish  to  risk  confiscation  until  tbey 
are  sure  that  it  is  out  of  the  power  of  any  one  to  ruin  them  by  shutting  off 
their  water  supply.  Irrigators  who  have  their  money  already  invested,  who 
have  planted  orchards  and  vineyards,  and  have  built  up  prosperous  homes, 
surrounded  by  verdant  meadows,  and  embowered  in  roses  and  vines,  in  the 
18 


272 


midst  of  arid  deserts,  through  the  agency  of  water,  are  even  more  deeply  in- 
terested in  having  a  code  of  laws  which  will  guarantee  them  the  perpetual  en- 
joyment of  the  wealth  they  have  created.  They  want  laws  which  will  protect 
thelDQ  from  mutual  encroachment,  whose  administration  will  give  to  each  ap- 
propriator  the  quantity  to  which  he  is  entitled  by  proscriptive  right,  and 
which  will  prevent  strife,  or  worse,  in  the  division  of  the  supply  among  the 
consumers. 

In  all  previous  efforts  of  attaining  such  legislation,  the  representatives  of 
San  Francisco  and  Oakland,  with  the  exception  of  Senator  Whitney,  and  one 
or  two  others  perhaps,  have  taken  no  very  active  interest.  To  them  it  has 
seemed  to  be  a  fight  which  did  not  greatly  concern  their  constituents,  and 
they  have  either  held  aloof  or  given  it  lukewarm  encouragement,  if  not  posi- 
tively opposed  to  the  measures  proposed.  They  have  not  risen  to  an  appre- 
ciation of  the  fact  that  thoy  are  as  deeply  interested  as  any  one  else.  They 
do  not  see  that  if  all  the  waters  that  now  flow  to  the  sea,  through  our  great 
unutilized  valleys,  were  spread  upon  the  lands,  our  State  would  suppjprt  sev- 
eral millions  of  people  in  addition  to  its  present  population,  and  that  San 
Francisco  and  Oakland  would  increase  in  business,  in  wealth,  and  in  popula- 
tion, in  a  proportionate  degree  to  the  general  growth  of  the  State.  But  the 
earnestness  and  persistence  of  the  advocates  of  irrigation  is  beginning  to  have 
its  effect,  and  there  is  evidence  that  the  merchants  and  property-holders  of 
our  two  great  seaboard  cities  are  awakening  to  the  situation.  The  coming 
convention,  to  be  held  in  San  Francisco,  May  20th,  should  arouse  their  inter- 
est. They  will  learn  from  the  men  who  will  be  present,  and  who  understand 
the  situation^  the  story  of  their  grievances,  the  trials  and  the  perils  of  the 
irrigators,  and  they  will  then  see  in  a  clear  light  one  of  the  causes  of  the  slow 
growth  of  our  State,  and  why  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Dakota,  Minnesota,  and 
other  Western  States  and  Territories,  with  soils  less  fertile,  and  climate  bleak 
and  severe,  have  so  far  outstripped  our  beautiful  land  in  population  and  agri- 
cultural developments.  The  explanation  is  simple.  Our  valleys  need  irriga- 
tion to  produce  the  varied  crops  required  to  support  dense  populations,  and 
we  are  allowing  the  wealth  of  the  land  to  flow  by  to  the  sea  unused,  because 
timid  capital  fears  to  invest  in  the  necessary  works  without  protective  legisla- 
tion. We  must  start  with  the  square  principle,  embodied  in  our  constitution, 
if  need  be,  that  the  waters  of  our  streams  belong  to  the  State,  and  are  to  be 
utilized,  and  that  every  encouragement  must  be  given  through  beneficent 
laws  for  their  utilization. 


Livermore  Valley  Review. 

The  Irri£fation  Q,ae8tion. 

The  address  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Fresno  Irrigation  Conven- 
tion, recently  published,  appears  to  have  met  universal  approval  throughout 
the  State.  And  the  action  of  the  Committee  in  calling  a  mass  convention  to 
meet  in  San  Francisco  in  May,  has  also  been  generally  commended.    If  we 


J 


i 


273 


can  judge  from  the  tone  of  the  newspapers,  both  city  and  country,  the  vital 
subject  of  water  rights  discussed  by  the  Committee  and  to  be  considered  by 
the  convention  next  month  is  attracting  merited  attention  in  every  direction. 
And  this  is  well.  There  is  no  more  important  question  before  the  people  of 
California.  Just  now  we  have  been  having  in  most  parts  of  the  State  copious 
rains.  But  with  the  experience  of  forty  years  we  know  that  this  grateful 
downpour  is  exceptional.  Next  year  and  perhaps  for  several  years  to  come, 
the  soil  of  the  great  valleys  will  be  parched  and  too  arid  for  cultivation  unless 
an  artificial  supply  of  water  is  afforded.  The  vast  grain  fields  and  extensive 
vineyards  and  orchards  in  the  end  depend,  and  must  ever  depend,  upon  irri- 
gation. It  is  the  essential  requirement  of  the  physical  conditions  of  the 
great  valley  of  California. 

It  is  only  surprising  that  there  should  be  any  question  at  all,  in  this  State, 
about  the  propriety,  the  necessity  and  the  legality  of  diverting  water  from  the 
running  streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating  and  fructifying  the  richly  pro- 
ductive lands  which,  when  watered,  so  willingly  Hoom  and  bear  fruits  be- 
neath our  sunny  skies.  In  all  other  lands  so  situated,  lauds  which  support 
hundreds  of  millions  of  the  human  race,  the  waters  of  heaven  are  dedicated 
by  custom  and  by  law  to  general  use.  Here  only,  of  all  the  arid  countries, 
the  claim  is  set  up  that  the  waters  in  running  streams  belong  to  the  riparian 
proprietors — the  owners  of  the  banks.  And  our  highest  court  has  so  decided, 
basing  its  conclusion  upon  the  fact  that  the  common  law  of  England  has  been 
made  the  rule  of  decision  in  California  and  that  in  England  such  is  the  law. 

The  irrigation  question  or  issue,  now  before  the  people  of  California,  can 
be  stated  very  briefly :  A  few  riparian  owners  claim  a  monopoly  of  the  water 
which  descends  to  and  traverses  the  great  valleys  and  which  is  absolutely 
necessary  tor  irrigation.  The  people  contend  that  this  water  is  public  prop- 
el ty  and  subject  to  be  diverted  and  used  for  the  general  good  under  proper 
governmental  regulations.  The  monopolists  say  that  the  law,  as  held  by  the 
Court,  favors  their  pretensions.  The  people  say  that  the  laws  were  not  in- 
tended to  destroy  but  to  conserve  and  that  if  the  letter  of  the  law  can  be  so 
construed  as  to  ruin  the  agriculture  of  the  State  it  must  be  changed  and  made 
so  clear  that  in  the  future  there  can  be  no  question  of  the  right  to  divert 
water  for  irrigation. 

The  Pleasanton  Star. 

Importance  of  IrrigatioTk, 

The  irrigation  problem  which  is  now  exciting  and  receiving  so  much  atten- 
tion is  of  vital  importance  to  the  State.  And  not  only  to  the  agricultural 
districts,  whose  aridity  of  the  land  renders  an  artificial  supply  of  water  abso- 
lutely necessary,  but  also  to  the  two  great  cities  on  the  bay.  San  Francisco 
and  Oakland  are  dependents  for  their  prosperity  upon  the  tributary  country 
which  lies  in  the  immense  valley  between  the  Sierras  and  the  Coast  Range, 
This  valley  of  California,  comprising  more  than  fifty  million  acres  of  land,  in 


274 


its  climatic  and  physical  characteristics  and  in  its  capacity  for  luxuriant  and 
varied  prodactiveness,  is  entirely  unlike  any  other  portion  of  the  United 
States  beyond  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  as  different  from  England,  whence 
our  laws  and  civilization  came,  as  are  the  steppes  of  Asia.  The  soil  in  this 
vast  basin,  when  fructified  by  sufficient  moisture,  is  as  productive  as  any  on 
earth.  The  cereals,  vines,  fruits,  all  the  products  of  the  temperate  zone  and 
many  of  the  semi-tropics  thrive.  Could  the  arable  laud  iu  this  valley  be 
brought  under  cultivation,  it  would  sustain  a  population  of  from  ten  to  fifteen 
millions.  And  if  this  were  done;  if  this  population  could  be  secured  by  im- 
migration of  those  of  our  own  race,  what  mighty  cities  would  be  bujlt  and 
sustained  on  the  bay  whose  Golden  Gate  invites  the  commerce  of  the  world. 

The  future  of  California  in  this  rpgard  turns  upon  the  question  of  a  suffi- 
cient supply  of  water  for  land.  The  annual  fall  of  rain  is  not  sufficient  in 
many  and  most  parts  to  enable  it  to  be  cultivated.  Over  large  regions  the 
yearly  precipitation  does  not  exceed  on  an  average  four  or  five  inches.  Hence 
we  say  an  artificial  water  supply  is  absolutely  necessary  to  agriculture. 

In  this  respect  the  country  is  not  particularly  peculiar.  It  differs  strikingly 
as  we  have  said,  from  the  Atlantic  States  and  from  England,  but  in  many 
^ther  parts  of  the  world  dense  populations  subsist  upon  arid  lands  in  compar- 
atively rainless  regions.  But  the  experience  of  man  from  the  earliest  ages 
taught  him  to  utilize  water  found  in  natural  reservoirs  and  running  streams 
and  so  to  irrigate  the  dry  soil  as  to  produce  luxuriant  vegetables.  And  in  all 
such  countries  the  right  to  take  water  from  the  streams  for  irrigation  was,  in 
the  nature  of  things,  recognized  and  enforced  as  the  customary  law  of  the 
land. 

And  such  everybody  supposed  to  be  the  law  of  this  arid  region  until  a  few 
riparian  owners  along  the  streams  which  descend  from  the  surrounding 
mountains  and  traverse  the  valley  set  up  a  claim  of  ownership  to  the  running 
waters.  And  then  the  highest  court  of  the  State  suddenly  announces  that  the 
existing  laws  warrant  and  sustain  the  claims  of  such  riparian  proprietors. 

Space  will  not  here  permit  our  discussing  these  remarkable  pretensions  nor 
the  extraordinary  decision  upholding  them. 

Whatever  the  law  may  be  or  may  have  been,  it  is  certain  that  the  people  of 
California  are  now  aroused  to  the  necessity  of  enacting  such  laws,  and  of 
obtaining  Judges  who  will  enforce  them,  that  the  lands  which  produce  our 
wealth  and  which  are  the  source  of  our  prosperity  shall  not  be  made  a  desert 
for  want  of  the  water  which  belongs  to  the  soil. 

This  is  the  signification  of  the  irrigation  movement. 


Berkeley  Advocate. 

Water  is  Wealtb  for  AU. 

There  is  no  subject  receiving  more  attention  throughout  the  State,  at  this 
time,  than  the  irrigation  question.  Our  country  contemporaries  are  discuss- 
ing it  in  all  its  phases,  especially  since  the  recent  call  lor  an  Irrigation  Con- 


275 


▼ention  to  meet  in  San  Francisco  in  May.  And  we  learn  that  the  suggestions 
and  advice  of  the  Committee  of  the  Fresno  Convention,  in  respect  to  organ- 
ization, are  being  carried  out,  especially  in  the  southern  counties,  and  that 
"Anti-Riparian  Irrigation  Clubs"  are  being  rapidly  formed.  These  clubs 
will;  it  is  understood,  send  delegates  to  the  May  convention. 

It  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  this  matter  should  receive  so  much  attention 
and  consideration.  California  is  essentially  an  agricultural  State,  at  least 
agriculture,  including  wine  making  and  fruit  growing,  is  the  basis  of  our 
prosperity  and  wealth.  Merchandizing  and  manufacturing  are,  for  th© 
present,  and  will  be  for  a  long  time  to  come,  subsidiary  pursuits.  Even  our 
mining  interests  are  of  small  importance  when  compared  to  the  value  of 
the  products  of  our  soil.  And  when  we  take  into  consideration  the  fact  that 
the  great  valleys  which  are  already  producing  so  much,  and  which  are  capable 
of  sustaining  a  population  of  many  millions  of  people,  are  naturally  arid  and 
comparatively  rainless,  and  that  without  an  artificial  supply  of  water  from 
irrigation  the  land  must  remain  in  a  desert  state,  the  almost  paramount 
importance  of  this  movement  is  seen. 

It  seems  incredible  that  any  one  should  have  the  temerity  to  oppose  the 
proposition  that  the  waters  of  our  running  streams  should  be  taken  to  irri- 
gate the  most  productive  soil,  in  the  most  genial  clime,  beneath  the  fairest 
skies  on  earth.  And  yet  so  it  is  that  as  a  legal  proposition,  as  a  matter  of 
public  economy,  it  is  an  open  question  whether  water  may  be  diverted  from 
the  streams.  It  is  this  question  which  the  people  have  now  taken  up  and 
which  they  will  speedily  settle  in  favor  of  irrigation  and  prosperity. 

Let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  the  merchants  and  manufacturers  of  San  Fran- 
cisco and  of  Oakland  are  also  vitally  interested  in  this  contention.  Indeed 
property  holders  of  all  classes  in  those  cities,  and  persons  engaged  in  catering 
to  the  luxuries  and  amusements  of  the  people  of  the  State  are  interested  in 
the  question.  As  already  said,  agriculture,  wine  making  and  fruit  growing 
are  the  basis  of  the  wealth  of  California.  The  cities  depend  upon  the  country 
for  their  prosperity.  Whatever  enhances  the  agricultural  interest  increases 
the  riches  of  the  centers  of  population.  Whatever  injures  our  farmers,  vine- 
yardists  and  fruit  growers,  hurts  the  cities. 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  San  Francisco  and  Oakland,  as  well  as  our  inlands 
towns  and  cities,  will  send  able  and  intelligent  delegates  to  the  Convention,, 
which  will  assemble  May  20th.  Let  the  whole  subject  be  there  discussed  in: 
all  its  aspects  and  bearings,  and  let  a  plan  be  formulated  and  submitted  to 
the  people  for  settling  the  right  of  irrigation  beyond  all  future  question  or 
cavil.  If  this  is  done  by  a  body  of  representative  delegates  the  plan  will  be 
carried  out. 


Oakland  Sentinel. 

Ixrigatlon, 

No  more  important  question  has  ever  come  before  the  people  of  California 
than  that  which  relates  to  the  irrigation  of  arid  and  so-called  desert  land. 
These  lands,  which  lie  in  the  great  valleys,  comprise  a  large  portion  of  the 


276 


State.  They  are  susceptible  of  tb«  highest  condition  of  cultivation  and,  with 
water,  are  perhaps  the  most  productive  on  the  continent.  The  question  is, 
shall  they  have  such  necessary  water? 

The  fact  that  the  running  streams  and  reservoirs  in  the  mountains  are 
capable  of  supplying  this  essential  requirement  of  agriculture,  if  properly 
distributed,  is  unquestionable.  But  there  is  an  impediment,  constructive  or 
real,  to  the  utilization  of  this  water.  A  few  of  the  proprietors  of  lands  bor- 
dering on  the  streams  claim  that  under  the  English  common  law  doctrine  of 
riparian  rights,  which  they  say  has  been  recognized  by  our  Supreme  Court, 
they  have  the  exclusive  use  of  the  water,  and  that  it  cannot  be  diverted  from 
its  natural  channel  for  any  purpose  whatever. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  the  riparian  proprietors  can  have  any  use  for  this 
natural  outflow  from  the  mountains.  Indeed,  their  right  to  use  water  flowing 
by  their  banks,  in  any  way  that  will  reduce  the  volume,  is  denied  under  the 
authority  of  the  same  common  law  doctrine.  It  must  simply  pass  through 
their  lands  on  its  way  to  the  sea,  to  be  lost  in  the  waste  of  waters,  or  to  be 
swallowed  up  in  the  tule  swamps.  Meanwhile  the  desert  lands,  so  prolific 
under  the  influence  of  irrig  ition,  are  dedicated  or  relegated  to  sterility. 

Shall  such  conditions  as  these  continue  to  exist?  Will  the  Legislature  re- 
fuse to  annul  the  application  of  the  common  law  by  a  declaratory  statute,  and 
give  the  thirstinej  land  its  impsrative  need  and  to  California  a  widely  increas- 
ing development  and  prolific  production?  Will  it  condemn  the  great  valleys 
to  barrenness?    This  is  the  issue,  without  exaggeration  and  without  coloring. 


Haywards   Jonrnal. 

Irrififation  is  l¥ealth. 

It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  the  subject  of  irrigation  is  of  interest  to  none 
but  irrigators.  The  encouragement  of  irrigation  is  the  duty  of  every  one  in 
the  State.  Every  farmer,  every  wheat-grower,  every  merchant  or  manufac- 
turer, wants  a  market  for  his  products  or  his  goods.  Business  experience 
teaches  that  home  consumers  are  most  profitable  to  the  producer.  Every 
mile  of  transportation  increases  in  some  degree  the  cost  to  the  consumer  and 
lessens  the  profit  to  the  producer.  The  wheat-growers  of  California  are  to- 
day competing  under  great  disadvantages  with  foreign  producers  in  foreign 
markets  to  supply  the  dense  population  of  Europe.  With  a  million  or  ten 
millions  of  people  on  the  San  Joaquin  Valley,  a  market  for  home  consump- 
tion would  be  created  in  which  we  could  defy  foreign  competition.  But  we 
must  fill  that  valley  with  consumers  who  will  also  be  producers.  Stanislaus 
estimates  that  it  contains  elements  sufficient  for  the  support  of  from  ten  to 
fifteen  millions  of  people.  These  elements  are  a  dry  but  fertile  soil  and 
living  streams  of  water.  The  natural  dryness  of  climate  and  the  limited 
raintall  make  irrigation  necessary.  The  custom  of  settlers  has  heretofore 
been  to  select  the  more  easily  cultivated  lands,  generally  at  a  distance  from 
the  rivers,  and  after  constracting  ditches  or  canals,  to  divert  the  waters  for 


277 


irrigation.  The  custom  long  since  developed  into  unwritten  law,  whereby 
he  that  would  divert  water  for  a  beneficial  use  became  entitled  to  it  as  of 
right,  and  the  first  in  time  was  first  in  right.  The  foundations  of  this  law 
have  been  lately  shaken  by  a  judicial  earthquake,  and  no  longer  rest  secure. 
The  ghost  of  the  long  departed  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  now  walks  the 
night.  Under  this  doctrine  the  rivers  cannot  be  molested  and  water  cannot 
be  appropriated.  It  is  to  lay  this  ghost  that  the  irrigators  have  called  a  State 
Convention,  and  are  organizing  into  a  political  unity.  Their  platform  is 
their  right  of  the  free  appropriation  of  water  for  irrigation  and  down  with 
riparianism.     Success  to  them  is  wealth  to  us.    We  should  lend  them  a  hand. 


A^meda  Semi- Weekly  Argus. 

Prosperity  or  Decay, 

The  water  controversy  in  this  State,  between  the  irrigationists  and  riparian- 
ists,  involves  the  question  of  general  prosperity  on  the  one  hand  or  general 
ruin  and  decay  on  the  other.  It  is  a  contest  for  the  privilege  of  developing 
the  immense  resources  of  California  on  the  one  side,  or  maintaining  the  deso- 
lations of  the  desert  for  all  time  to  come  and  permitting  the  most  highly  cul- 
tivated portions  of  the  State,  the  rich  and  prolific  farms,  the  splendid  orch- 
ards, the  wide  and  profitable  vineyards,  to  die  and  of  thirst  and  lapse  into 
barrenness 

And  strange  as  it  may  seem,  this  alternative  is  maintained  by  the  riparian 
proprietors  of  the  State.  They  assert  their  right  to  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
water  in  the  running  streams  and  deny  the  right  to  divert  any  portion  of  it 
for  irrigation.  For  this  is  the  logical  conclusion  from  the  contention  that 
the  English  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  obtains  in  this  state. 
Like  Shylock  they  stand  by  their  bond  and  claim  their  pound  of  flesh. 
They  say  that  the  law  gives  them  the  exclusive  use  of  the  water  and  that  it 
is  nothing  to  them  if  the  rest  of  the  State  perishes  for  want  of  it.  This  la 
not  only  ^he  acme  of  selfishness,  but  a  monstrous  crime  against  society.  It 
is  a  conspiracy  against  the  prosperity  of  the  commonwealth,  and  the  men 
who  advocate  it  are  public  enemies. 

These  are  the  general  considerations  which  have  led  to  the  extraodinary 
movement  whose  progress  will  be  marked  by  the  Irrigation  Convention  which 
will  convene  in  San  Francisco  in  May.  The  last  Igislature  met  and  adjourned 
without  granting  relief.  The  judicial  sword  of  Democles  still  hangs  over  the 
prosperity  of  the  State,  and  now  the  masses  of  the  people  propose  to  take  the 
matter  into  their  own  hands.  They  have  the  power  to  grant  themselves  re- 
lief and  they  are  going  to  do  it. 


278 

Brooklyn  (Alameda  Go.)  Eagle. 

Irriiration  in  Politics.  * 

A  new  political  force  has  sprung  to  life,  full  grown,  armed  and  equipped. 
The  call  for  a  State  Irrigation  Convention  makes  apolitical  era  too  important 
*o  pass  without  notice.  The  address  of  the  Irrigation  Committee  lately 
issued  exhibits  a  conscious  power  that  may  well  attract  the  attention  of  people 
and  politicians.  The  irrigation  problem  merits  the  consideration  of  all  who 
have  a  great  future  for  the  State  at  heart.  Whoever  has  the  ambition  which 
seeks  to  pass  the  glory  of  political  honors  to  his  posterity,  whoever  desires 
that  his  children,  and  his  children's  children,  may  profit  from  the  advance- 
ment of  the  Commonwealth,  will  not  carelessly  cast  aside  the  irrigation  ques- 
tion as  unworthy  of  room  in  his  thoughts.  We  have  come  to  view  the  aston- 
ishing material  progress  of  the  State  from  year  to  year  as  a  matter  of  course, 
and  have  cot  sought  the  causes  of  our  rapidly  incr^sing  wealth,  beyond  a 
general  idea  of  the  illimitable  resources  of  oar  soil  and  climate.  A  cursory 
glance  at  the  statistics  will  reveal  the  fact  that  a  large  part  of  the  people  sub- 
sist from  irrigation,  and  that  millions  of  the  annual  wealth  of  production 
comes  from  the  same  source.  Also  that  the  future  annual  increase  of  pro- 
duction by  the  same  means,  alrnost  defies  calculation. 

Shall  we  foster  irrigation  or  abandon  it?  That  is  a  question  for  this  peo- 
ple to  answer  at  the  next  election.  Are  we  of  this  country  interested  in 
the  answer?  None  more  so.  The  greatness  of  New  York  City,  of  every 
commercial  metropolis,  rests  upon  the  populous  and  productive  interior  to 
which  it  may  be  the  market  and  depot  of  supply.  Whatever  bailds  up  San 
Francisco  and  Oakland  adds  to  the  value  of  lands  in  the  suburbs  and  vicinity. 
Put  three  million  people  into  the  San  Joaqnin  valley,  and  these  two  cities  will 
have  a  population  of  a  million  to  be  fed  from  your  gardens,  orchards  and 
farms.  But  to  this  the  right  of  irrigation  must  be  guaranteed.  There  are 
fifty  million  acres  of  land  awaiting  that  guarantee.  There  are  a  million  acres 
now  ditched  and  ready  for  cultivation,  open  to  sale  to  colonists  and  settlers, 
which  will  be  filled  the  moment  water  rights  for  irrigation  are  assured.  The 
only  barrier  to  an  immediate  enormous  immigration  into  Southern  Califor- 
nia is  an  obsolete  rule  of  law  known  as  the  English  common  law  doctrine  of 
riparian  proprietorship,  by  virtue  of  which  the  owner  of  lands  at  the  mouth 
of  a  river  can  prevent  any  use  of  the  water  above  him.  This  rule  of  law  is 
^9  now  being  asserted  and  must  be  stamped  out  for  the  sake  of  irrigation.  To 
this  end  are  the  irrigators  organizing.  They  will  have  the  sympathy  and 
vote  of  all  far-seeing  men. 

San  Leandro  Reporter. 

Irrifi^ation  Convention. 

On  May  20th  there  will  meet  in  San  Francisco  a  representative  body  of 
representative  men  from  various  portions  of  the  State,  whose  business  it  will 
be  to  plan  and  lay  out  a  great  work— a  work  of  immeasurable  importance  to 


279 


the  future  welfare  of  California.  We  speak  of  the  Irrigation  Convention,  the 
call  for  which  has  been  heretofore  published. 

It  is  now  approaching  two  years  since  the  agricultural  population  inhabit- 
ing the  great  almost  rainless  valleys  of  the  State  and  the  mercantile  and  man- 
ufacturing classes  interested  with  and  dependent  on,  in  a  degree,  upon  them, 
were  startled  with  the  announcement  that  the  laws  of  California  do  not  recog- 
nize the  right  of  the  people  to  appropriate  and  divert  water  from  running 
streams  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation.  Our  readers  are  so  familiar  with  the 
exact  issue  of  the  controversy  between  the  irrigators  and  riparianists  that  we 
need  not  here  restate  it.  In  our  judgment  a  vast  majority  of  the  people  who 
gave  the  subject  attention,  and  no  subject  has  been  more  discussed,  consid- 
ered and  now  consider  that  the  rule  of  law  announced  by  the  Supreme  Court 
was,  and  is,  fraught  with  infinite  mischief  and  danger  to  the  present  welfare 
and  future  prosperity  of  California.  In  a  word,  and  without  entering  into 
details,  irrigation  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the  existence  of  agriculture,  to 
any  extent,  in  the  State;  and  in  the  term  agriculture  we  include  vine  culture 
and  fruit  raising  in  the  great  valleys. 

As  soon  as  it  became  known  that  the  English  common  law  doctrine  of 
riparian  rights  had  been  recognized  and  to  the  exclusion  of  the  right  to  appro- 
priate and  divert  water  for  irrigation,  the  whole  southern  part  of  the  State, 
which  is  most  affected  by  the  decision,  was  aroused.  In  a  short  time  two 
conventions  were  called  and  held,  one  at  Riverside  and  one  at  Fresno.  Com- 
mittees were  appointed  to  apply  to  the  Legislature  for  relief  from  the  threat- 
ened danger.  Bills  were  drafted  and  carried  to  Sacramento.  It  was  found 
that  the  Governor  and  a  large  majority  of  both  houses  of  the  Legislature  were 
favorable  to  the  measures,  but  the  session  passed  away  without  final  action. 
A  few  connubiating  and  filibustering  Senators  succeeded  in  defeating  the 
bills — hence  the  present  movement. 

This  question  must  be  settled  and  at  once;  there  is  too  much  at  stake,  not 
only  the  millions  invested  in  lands  dependent  upon  irrigation  and  in  canals 
and  ditches,  but,  too,  as  we  have  said,  the  mercantile,  mechanical  and  manu- 
facturing interests  connected  with  agriculture.  Until  this  overshadowing 
issue  is  settled  improvement  will  be  checked  in  a  great  degree  and  these  in- 
terests will  continue  to  suffer. 

The  work  for  the  May  convention  to  do  will  be  to  eflfeclually  arouse  the 
people  of  the  State  to  a  comprehension  of  the  evils  of  riparianism,  and  the 
importance  of  irrigation,  and  to  perfect  an  organization  throughout  the  State 
that  can  make  itself  felt  at  the  election  in  November,  and  this  we  under- 
stand to  be  the  intention  of  those  interested  in  the  movement.  Since  they 
have  been  placed  by  the  courts  and  the  Legislature  in  the  position  to  be 
compelled  to  depend  upon  political  action  they  propose  to  make  a  political 
issue  of  their  fight.     Success  to  the  irrigators. 


280 


Inyo  Independent. 

Irrig'atlon. 

No  other  question  now  before  the  people  of  this  Sta'e  is  of  so  much  im- 
portance as  that  of  irrigation.  Upon  a  wise  settlement  of  this  matter  the 
prosperity  of  the  State  will  iu  great  measure  depend.  The  present  state  of 
the  law  governing  the  use  of  the  water  from  streams  is  very  unsatisfactory, 
and  should  be  remedied  as  speedily  as  possible.  Bills  were  introduced  at 
the  last  session  of  the  Legislature,  that  would  have  remedied  most  of  the 
existing  evil,  but  as  the  Raral  Press  says,  failed  through  the  ignorance  of  the 
members  of  the  Legislature.  It  is  important  that  measures  should  be  under- 
taken to  secure  a  better  understanding  of  these  matters.  It  is  necessary 
that  the  coming  Legislature  should  act  upon  the  subject  and  enact  laws 
which  shall  meet  the  needs  of  the  people  and  the  growth  of  the  State.  The 
subjects  were  brought  before  the  last  Legislature  aud  a  strong  effort  made  to 
secure  legislation^  bnt  without  effect.  Much  of  the  difficulty  laid  in  the  ig- 
norance of  many  of  the  legislators  whose  lives  have  been  cast  beside  city 
walks,  rather  than  beside  running  streams.  By  beginning  early  this  year, 
it  is  hoped  that  men  can  be  elected  who  have  clear  ideas  upon  the  subject 
and  can  be  trusted  to  legislate  intelligently. 


Mariposa  Herald. 

Irrififation. 

Among  other  important  questions  now  agitating  California  is  whether  an 
irrigation  system  should  be  ingrafted  into  our  law.  As  the  law  now  stands 
the  old  English  common  law  prevails;  and  under  it,  owners  of  land  bordering 
upon  a  stream  are  entitled  to  thi  flow  of  the  stream.  Owing  to  the  physical 
condition  and  situation  of  England,  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  was  politic, 
consistent  and  just;  but  in  this  State  where  different  physical  conditions  ex- 
ist, where  the  streams  are  larger  and  longer,  and  where  vast  volumes  of  water 
flow  unused  and  without  profit  to  the  sea,  a  different  policy  should  obtain, 
and  the  rights  to  the  use  and  benefits  of  water  should  be  conformable  to  our 
natural  status.  A  rational,  practical  irrigation  system  stands  knocking  at  our 
door  asking  admittance.  Vast  tracts  of  thirsty,  barren  lands,  unfit  for  any- 
thing as  they  now  are,  would  bloom  with  verdure  and  fruitfulness,  if  properly 
and  systematically  irrigated.  Our  sister  county,  Fresno,  with  her  arid  acres 
of  sandy  plains,  has  tasted  the  refreshing,  invigorating  draughts  of  water. 
Whole  sections  of  that  county,  a  few  years  since  a  desert  waste,  now  present 
the  very  picture  of  thrifty  life,  where  happy  comfortable  homes,  substantial 
and  elegant  schools,  neat  and  spacious  churches,  have  sprung  into  life  as  if 
touched  by  the  wondrous  power  of  magic.  All  this  change,  wrought  by  a  de- 
viation from  the  law  as  it  now  is,  will  be  swept  away  if  irrigation  gains  no 
footing;  all  the  improvements  that  have  been  made  will  sink  from  sight,  and 
the  same  old  desolate  aspect  will  meet  the  inquiring  look  of  parsing  travelers. 


281 


All  the  beautif q1,  happy,  useful  results  growing  from  a  diversion  and  spread- 
ing of  water,  are  brought  about  by  no  material  comparative  injury  to  other 
enterprises.  Thousands  of  acres  now  lying  unused  and  unoccupied  in  all 
parts  of  the  State,  and  of  no  account  to  man  or  beast,  would  be  transformed 
into  the  busy  scenes  of  prosperity  and  culture.  Thousands  of  families  would 
plant  themselves  in  our  midst  and  reap  an  enjoyable  living.  Invested  capital 
would  realize  a  fair  return,  and  all  sections  would  be  tributary  in  building 
up  the  splendid  possibilities  of  our  future. 

Legislative  action  is  necessary  to  accomplish  the  desired  end.  The  exist- 
ing law  must  be  repealed,  and  new  and  adequate  provisions  adopted  in  lieu 
thereof.  Friends  of  irrigation  are  alert,  and  are  taking  '  'Time  by  the  fore- 
lock" so  see  to  it  that  proper  representatives  are  sent  to  the  next  Legislature, 
Merced  is  about  entering  into  an  era  of  prosperity  through  irrigation.  Our 
neighbor  sees  the  utility  and  advisability  of  such  a  system ;  and  it  is  therefore 
almost  if  not  absolutely  safe  to  say  that  this  Assembly  District  will  send  a 
man  to  Sacramento  imbued  with  the  spirit  of  irrigation  and  pledged  to  use 
every  effort  in  securing  the  necessary  change  in  our  law. 


Daily  San  Diegan. 

Riparianism. 

Are  you  a  riparian  or  anti-riparian,  is  the  question  the  voluble  politician 
will  be  called  upon  to  answer,  and  in  certain  sections  of  the  State,  to  dodge 
this  question  or  skulk  behind  an  ambiguous  answer  means  political  death  and 
a  hasty  burial.  The  Executive  Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention 
has  sent  an  address  to  the  press  throughout  the  State,  which  is  a  ringing 
document  on  this  important  question,  and  voices  with  no  uncertain  sound 
the  purposes  of  anti-riparians,  and  the  issues  involved  in  the  settlement  of 
an  old  English  law,  that  is  as  much  out  of  place  in  its  application  to  the  ne- 
cessities and  conditions  of  California  as  the  feudal  law  of  the  Middle  Ages 
would  be  in  the  midst  of  American  political  institutions.  We  believe  that 
running  water,  like  the  air,  is  the  free  gift  of  God,  and  not  to  be  possessed, 
appropriated  and  held  by  the  few  to  the  detriment  and  destruction  of  the 
many.  The  peculiarities  of  our  soil  and  climate,  the  extremes  of  dryness  and 
moisture  that  divide  our  seasons,  fixed  by  an  inexorable  law  the  necessity  for 
artificial  irrigation,  without  which  the  mighty  possibilities  of  future  develop- 
ment of  the  agricultural  resources  of  this  State  will  be  strangled  at  the  very 
threshold  of  its  almost  miraculous  career.  Riparianism  in  its  tendencies  and 
ultimate  results  will  produce  a  condition  of  affairs  similar  to  the  horrible 
strait  of  Coleridge's  mariner,  "water,  water  everywhere  and  not  a  drop  to 
drink."  Millions  of  gallons  of  water  would  flow  usekssly  to  its  appointed 
reservoir,  the  sea,  if  riparianism  is  to  prevail  as  the  absolute  law  of  the  State. 
Manifestly  this  is  wrong  in  theory,  law  and  results.  Every  agency  that 
nature  has  placed  in  our  reach  to  rescue  the  soil  from  barrenness  to  fertility 
should  be  utilized,  and  the  right  should  exist  paramount  to  all  individual  ad- 


282 


Tantages  to  appropriate  that  which  will  subserve  the  good  of  the  many.  It 
is  a  law  eternal  as  the  hills,  and  unchangeable  as  that  of  the  Medes  and  Per- 
sians, that  the  rights  of  the  few  must  yield  to  the  necessities  and  welfare  of 
the  many.  Riparianism  is  centripetal  in  its  tendencies,  irrigation  is  centrif- 
ugal in  its  scope  and  purposes,  and  should  be  the  law  and  the  gospel  of 
California. 


Fresno  Republican. 

Biparian  rights  will  be  so  deeply  buried  by  the  irrigationists  this  fall  that 
the  question  will  never  again  stand  in  the  way  of  progress  and  prosperity  in 
our  State.  It  is  a  disgrace  to  California  courts  that  English  common  law  was 
ever  admitted  as  applicable  to  the  water  question  in  this  State,  and  this  ad- 
mission was  a  mistake  that  the  people  are  going  to  correct  at  the  coming  elec. 
tion.  The  Governor,  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  members  of  the 
Legislature  to  be  elected  this  fall  will  have  to  hold  up  their  right  hands  and 
take  a  solemn  pledge  to  carry  out  the  will  of  the  people  in  favor  of  irrigation. 


Santa  Cruz  Sentinel. 

A  Cripple  or  a  Giantess. 

It  is  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  supreme  importance  of  this  irrigation 
question  to  our  State.  California  will  be  a  hobbling  cripple  if  the  riparian 
doctrine  prevails;  she  will  be  a  robust  giantess  of  unrivalled  powers  and 
queenly  mien  if  the  irrigation  doctrine  is  established.  That  doctrine  is 
already  established  in  the  will  of  a  vast  majority  of  our  people.  All  that  is 
needed  is  to  give  that  will  a  legal  form  and  direction.  This  is  the  object  of 
the  proposed  Convention. 


Kern  County  Gazette. 

Irrijj^ation  in  the  Coming  Campaigrn. 

There  is  no  mistaking  the  tenor  of  the  ringing  address  of  the  Executive 
Committee  of  the  State  Irrigation  Convention,  issued  on  April  6th.  It 
sounds  the  keynote  of  the  coming  political  campaign,  and  it  means  that  the 
irrigation  issue  is  to  become  paramount  to  all  other  considerations  before  the 
polls.  The  irrigators  are  fully  alive  to  the  fact  that  riparianism  is  menacing 
their  very  existence,  and  they  are  preparing  to  speak  in  thunder  tones  in  the 
assertion  of  their  rights  and  in  the  maintenance  of  the  principles  that  "the 
right  of  appropriation  of  water  for  beneficial  purposes  is  and  always  has 
been  paramount  to  any  alleged  rights  of  riparian  owners  in  this  State."  The 
address  recites  the  history  of  the  movement  to  secure  the  passage  of  bills 
remedying  the  evils  of  existing  laws  relating  to  appropriation  and  adminis- 
tration of  water,  framed  and  recommended  by  the  Fresno  Convention  of 
1884,  the  earnest  support  of  these  measures  by  the  intelligent  press  of  the 


283 


State  and  the  last  Legislature,  through  the  parliamentary  filibustering  of 
the  riparian  minority  in  both  houses,  notwithstanding  the  active  sympathy 
given  them  by  a  vast  majority  of  the  people  of  the  State.  After  referring  to 
the  progress  already  made  in  irrigation,  it  is  stated  that  the  acreage  is  insig- 
nificant compared  with  the  desert  unreclaimed,  and  that  within  the  rim  of 
great  interior  valleys  there  are  64,000,000  acres  of  inhabitable  land,  equal  in 
area  to  all  the  New  England  States  and  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  added, 
whose  combined  population  is  13,427,270  souls.  The  total  population  of 
our  valleys  is  but  284,000,  or  5%  persons  to  the  square  mile,  while  the 
average  population  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Sacramento  valleys  is  even 
less — 4.9  per  square  mile.  If  these  latter  valleys  were  as  densely  populated 
as  the  basin  of  the  St.  Lawrence  their  inhabitants  would  number  1,856,000; 
if  equal  to  the  New  England  coast,  3,588,000;  if  equal  to  the  Ontario  basin, 
4,523,000;  if  equal  to  the  valley  of  the  Delaware,  10,208,000.  The  conclu- 
sion to  be  drawn  from  these  statistics  is  that  the  valleys  of  California  should 
support  a  population  of  11,000,000  people;  but  that  these  results  can  only  be 
secured  by  irrigation,  on  account  of  the  lack  of  rainrall,  its  uncertainty  from 
year  to  year,  and  its  unequal  distribution  throughout  the  season  when  it  is 
needed  for  the  maturing  of  crops.  To  add  force  to  these  statistics  a  com- 
parison might  have  been  drawn  between  the  relative  density  of  the  popula- 
tion upon  irrigated  lands,  and  that  supported  by  farming  lands  dependent 
solely  upon  rainfall.  We  venture  the  assertion  that  if  the  truth  were  known 
the  irrigation  communities  of  this  State  can  show  an  average  population  ten 
times  as  great  per  square  mile  as  the  average  population  upon  the  irrigated 
farming  lands,  and  this  of  itself  is  the  strongest  evidence  of  the  necessity 'of 
irrigation  and  a  radical  change  in  methods  of  farming,  in  order  that  the 
lands  may  support  the  greatest  population  of  which  they  are  capable. 

The  richest  of  soils,  the  most  genial  of  climates,  and  water  in  abundance 
fed  by  exhaustless  snows  and  springs,  are  here  to  be  found,  and  "the 
thought  is  insufferable  that  uncongenial  law  shall  permit  human  selfishness 
to  forbid  the  bands  between  these  gifts  of  God,  and  by  keeping  land  and 
water  wastefully  apart,  deny  the  world  the  benefits  and  blessings  of  their 
union." 

The  counties  vitally  interested  in  irrigation  cast  upwards  of  40,000  votes, 
and  to  these  voters  the  address  of  the  committee  appeals  to  form  themselves 
into  anti-riparian  irrigation  clubs.  In  union  there  is  strength,  and  these 
clubs  organized  and  united,  with  the  earnestness  of  purpose  and  unflinch- 
ing determination  of  j'men  defending  their  homes  from  desolation  and  ruin  can 
dictate  the  coming  campaign.  To  them  all  other  political  considerations  will 
be  dropped,  and  only  those  men  who  favor  progressive  development  in  the 
State  by  irrigation  can  be  electedgas  governor,  attorney-general.  Supreme  and 
Superior  Court  judges,  and  legislators,  if  their  united  efforts  are  of  any  avail. 
A  State  Convention  is  called  to  meet  in  San  Francisco  May  20th.  It  will 
consist  of  delegates  from  the  clubs  throughout  the  State,  and  its  object  will 
be  to  effect  a  permanent  central  organization  to  perfect  the  scheme  of  laws 
required  by  the  irrigators  and  urge  their  passage  by  the  next  Legislature, 


284 


and  to  formulate  a  plan  of  action  to  be  followed  in  the  coming  political  cam- 
paign, of  which  they  may  make  their  strength  felt  in  every  precinct  in  the  State. 
Their  objects  only  need  to  be  understood  and  the  nobility  of  their  purposes 
appreciated,  to  insure  them  a  rousing  success  in  the  campaign.  Who  is 
there  that  will  oppose  measures,  the  ultimate  result  of  which  will  make  Cali- 
fornia one  of  the  wealthiest  and  most  popular  States  in  the  Union,  aud  cre- 
ate in  San  Francisco  a  trade  center  second  only  to  New  York  in  size  aud  import- 
ance? Certainly  none  but  those  who  have  selfish  personal  ends  to  gratify,  and 
care  nothing  for  the  public  welfare.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  press  and  the  friends 
of  irrigation  to  disseminate  information  on  this  subject,  to  convince  the 
public  of  the  loftiness  of  their  aims,  and  to  show  in  their  clearest  manner 
the  serious  import  of  the  issues  before  them.  When  clearly  understood  it 
will  dawn  upon  the  public  mind  that  the  irrigation  question  far  exceeds  in 
importance  that  of  hydraulic  mining,  or  any  other  similar  issue  which  has 
been  appealed  to  the  judgment  of  the  public  and  the  courts,  and  when  so 
understood  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  public  verdict.  The  right  must 
triumph  and  irrigation  will  win. 


Los  Angeles  La  Cronica. 

Cuegtion  Magfna. 

En  nuestra  cuarta  p4gina  damos  una  traduccion  del  memorial  que  al  pub- 
lico han  dirijido  los  miembros  del  Comite  Ejecutivo  de  Kegadores  del  Estado. 
Oomo  nuestros  lectores  veran,  la  cuestion  es  de  interes  vital  para  el  Estado, 
y  debe  posponerse  a  toda  otra  cuestion  de  mera  conveniencia  politica,  que 
generalmente  solo  resulta  en  ser  empleados  los  que  ahora  no  lo  estan,  6  en 
que  continuen  viviendo  del  presupuesto  los  que  ahora  gozan  de  el:  general- 
mente estos  cambios  se  reducen  a  un  cambio  de  pildoras,  que  tanto  unas 
como  otras  hacen  el  mismo  efecto  al  estdmago  del  pueblo,  que  es  quien  paga. 

Pero  la  proposicion  que  presentan  los  regadores  es  mucha  mas  importante 
y  se  cifra  en  el  principio  de  si  hemos  de  aprovechar  las  aguas  para  hacer 
fructificar  terrenos  ahora  improductivos,  6  dejar  que  estos  continuen  desiertos 
porque  les  place  a  unos  pocos  que  el  vivificador  liquido  se  pierdo  en  el  mar. 

No  creemos  que  el  memorial  citado  dejara  de  hacer  sn  efecto,  pues  apela  4 
los  mejores  intereses  de  los  ciudadanos  de  todas  clases,  pues  la  agricultura 
es  la  base  m4s  sdlida  de  la  riqueza  de  este  Estado,  y  el  agua  de  riego  es  un 
elemento  indispensable  para  su  completo  desarrollo.  En  la  importantisima 
eleccion  que  este  aiio  tendr4  lugar  esta  deberia  ser,  y  sera4,  no  lo  dudamos, 
una  de  las  cuestiones  priucipales,  sino  la  principal. 


285 

Oallanb  Soiirnaf. 

Die  ^ett)dffentnG^frage. 

I^k  gragc  iiber  bie  33ertf)eiluni3  be§  395affcrDorrat()§  in  (£aIifornicn 
ift  cine  dugcrft  iDi(i)tige  imb  ein  ^onflift  jmifd^eu  ben  33ertrctern  bcr 
beiben  ©eftc^t^punftcn,  unter  benen  bie  grage  betradjtet  itjcrben  mug, 
ift  uuDermeibbar.    ©in  SompromiB  ift  unmdgtid). 

(^ntiDeber  ge()brt  ba^  gaffer,  tDeld)e0  t)on  unfcren  Bergen  ^erabftrdmt, 
ben  Seuten,  t>k  beabficf;tigen,  bie  bradj  liegenben  grogen  (Sbenen  unfere^ 
®taate§  p  bctraffern,  ober  ben  tDenigen  ®rnnbeigentl)itmern  am 
glngufer. 

ilBenn  eg  mafjr  ift,  iDie  bie  ^efiimorter  ber  55ert^ei(ung  be§  3Baffer^ 
fagen,  ba^  hk  natlirlidjen  Umftcinbe  in  (Ealifornien  ber  geringe  D^cgen- 
fad,  hk  i^rnd)tbarfeit  beg  Sobcng,  itjenn  er  bnrc^  bie  ^irfung  beg 
SBafferg  befrud)tet  ttiirb,  ber  njarme  langanbanernbe  (gonnenfdjein  nnb 
anbere  Umftcinbe,  hk  $ert)orbringung  t)on  D^ieberloffungen  benjirft 
l)aben,  fo  befi^en  bie  Uferbeit)ol)ner  alg  folc^e  feine  9^ed)te  auf  ba^ 
SKaffer,  ttjelc^eg  il)r  Sanb  bur(f)flie6t. 

ilBenn  im  ©egent^eil  ba^  englifc^e  ©efefe  biefem  ?anb  anfgebrnngen 
hjorben  ift,  ob  burd)  gefe^lidje  5lnorbnnng  ober  burc^  bie  ©riaffe  ber 
D?id)ter;  menn  bie  ©efe^e  iiber  3Bafferred)te  unb  t)k  Ueblic^feiten  einer 
ftetg  in  ^ebel  ge^iillten  3nfel,  hk  genligenb  ^enjcifferung  Ijat,  51U* 
njenbung  finben  fotten  auf  bieg  troiene  unb  bod)  unter^Umftanben 
Iuj:uridfe  l^anb  bc^  etDigen  @onnenfd)eing,  bann  laffe  man  eben  t>a^ 
@efe^  iralten  unb  bag  Gaffer  mug  augfd)liegtid)  bem  Uferbenjo^ner 
^ugefprod)en  werben.  ^ie  grage  faun,  iDie  gefagt,  nur  mit  „3a"  unb 
„Wm"  beantttjortet  loerben, 

2Benn  bk  ^ed)te  ber  Uferben)o^ner  anerfannt  werben,  b.  ^.  njenn 
ha^  (Sigent^umgrec^t  beg  ^Kafferg  bem  ©runbbcfi^er  am  Ufer  t>t^ 
gluffeg  adein  grf)ort,  bann  loirb  nac^  bem  eng(ifd)en  ®efe^  hk  Ijkv  fo 
notl)tt)enbige  -33obenben)afferung  unmdglic^  unb  bk  Sioilifation  njirb  auf 
bie  glugnfer,  bk  Ufer  unferer  :Sad)e  unb  unferer  (Siimpfe  befdjrcinft 
merben,  in  mW  le^teren  diele  9?innfale  derfc^minben.  ©elbft  bk 
UferbetDo^ner  biirfen  bk  gaffer  beg  gluffeg  nidjt  ableiten  unb  baburd) 
Derminbern,  mil  bag  @efet^  bieg  oerbietet. 

T)ie  not^njenbige  (2d)IugfoIgerung  aug  bem  borgebrad)ten  5(rgument 
ift,  ba^  bie  flimatifc^en  S3erl)a(tniffe  unfereg  ©taateg  er^eifdjen,  ba^  bk 
Slnfpriidie  ber  Uferbenjofjucr  n  i  d)  t  beriid ficbtigt  toerben. 


286 

3)ie  grage  mu^  ent|d)ieben  ttjerben,  bag  cin  fitr  aflcinal  bie  UferBewo^ner 
fcin  c^*clufbe§  ^cdjt  aiif  ha^  glugiDaffcr  fjaben,  tucIc^eS  i^r  i'aub  3tT)ccf* 
lo^  burrfjfliegt, 

3n  ■53egug  aitf  bic  9?cci)te  fiir  bag  SSaffer  fitr  irrigation  gilt  ha^ 
@efe^  friil)efter  ^efi^ergrcifung,  H)cld)e§  in  alien  ![^anbern  anerfannt 
tuirb  unb  and)  f)icr  geltcn  fotlte, 

(Sine  iCcrfammlung  ber  „3rngatore"  f)at  fitrglicf)  in  gre§no  ftattge* 
fnnben  nnb  njir  finb  kgierig,  ob  hk  bort  gefagten  ^ef(J)litffe  bie  not^igc 
SBirfnng  anf  bie  in  ber  grage  ^etrtffenen  nnb  bie  gefe^lidjen  (Sntfd)ei* 
bnngen  l)aben  tuirb.  ^ie  grage  ift  eine  ber  it)idjtigften,  iDeld;e  je^t  bie 
^nfmerffamfeit  ber  garmer  anf  fic^  gie^t. 


PETITIONS 


Presented    to    the  Senate    and    Assembly,    Asking    the    Passage   of 
Irrigation  Bills. 


To  the  Senate  and  Assembly  of  the  Legislature  of  California: 

Your  petitioners,  citizens  and  land  owners  of  the  county  of  Fresno,  do  re- 
spectfully represent  to  your  honorable  body  that  our  property,  our  homes, 
and  our  very  existence  depends  on  the  right  of  appropriation  of  water  for 
irrigation,  and  we  pray  that  you  will  place  us  under  the  protection  of  law. 
We  respectfully  represent  that  we  are  satisfied  with  the  bills  now  before 
your  honorable  body,  which  were  prepared  by  a  committee  appointed  by  a 
convention  of  irrigators,  held  in  the  town  of  Fresno  last  December,  said 
committee  being  fully  informed  of  our  wants  and  necessities  and  having 
provided  foi  them  to  our  satisfaction.  That  your  action  in  this  matter  may 
be  speedy  and  favorable,  your  petitioners  will  ever  pray. 

Names ,                                                                                         No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

S.N.Walker 3,700  $32,000 

W.  H.  Chance 500  14,000 

A.G.Andersen 40  2,000 

S.  W    Henry 164  1,000 

S.C.  Booth 60  2,50a 

P.  B.  Donohoe 664  30,000 

Wm.  Wilkenson 560  16,000 

Otto  Froelut  31  10,000 

Geo.  H.  Eggers 3,000  200,000 

W.  P.  Quick 80  15,000 

M.  F.  Tarpey 160  10,000 

Geo.  W.  Taps 80  5,000 

Geo.  Bernhard 60  5,000 

J.  S.  Elliott 480  15,000 

C.  Erickson 80  16,000 

Wm    Bitteridge 85  3,000 

C.W.  Cutler 40  4,000 

G.  W.  Hensley 40  8,000 

C.  G.  Sayle 1,500  26,000 

M.  S.  Harris 20  1,£00 

C.A.Fuller 40  8,000 

F.  E.  Paddock,  Jr 40  4,000 

Chas.  A.  Beesley 40  10.000 

Fred  Kramer 860  15,000 

19 


288 


Names.                                                                                  No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

A.  W,  Lyon 80  $10,000 

J.  W.  Coffman : 40  4,000 

J.R.Austin 40  3,000 

W.J.Dickey 210  5,000 

Jim  Cory 120  16,000 

Chas.  Warfield 15  2,000 

J.  Eock 20  1,000 

S.  S.  Wright  (Agent  for) 5,000  150,000 

Geo.  Studen 5  5,000 

Wm.  H.  Ahers 5  5,000 

Wm.  Gash 70  8,000 

BairdBros 160  16,000 

D.  C.  McLaughlin 20  2,000 

Daniel  McLaughlin  40  18.000 

Wm.  Adams 40  4,000 

E.  Keeler 325  4,000 

C.H.  Haun 50  11,000 

Jos.  Lee * 110  9,000 

B.  F.  Burton 80  4,000 

John  Brown.   480  9,000 

J.  W.  Loper 20  ''^00 

L.  Lewis  . .    240  7,000 

C.  H.  Carghill... 20  3,0(0 

H.  N.  Ewiug  80  ,000 

P.  K.  Peaters 20  3,000 

A.  F.  Peaters 20  3,000 

A.  D.  Ewing 20  3,500 

F.A.Eddy 10  1,200 

H.B.  Choice 400  15,000 

A.  H.  Statham 403  25,000 

E.H.Gould 200  20.000 

Estate  of  Geo.  H.  Briggs,  deceased,  by  A.  P.  Catlin, 

Administrator 4,500  250,000 

A.  P.  Catlin 575  12,000 

G.  R.  Fanning 160  8,000 

F.  J.  Haber 80  4,000 

W.  T.  Oden 320  15,000 

John  Wilde 80  6,000 

E.  L.  Wemple 20  4,000 

S.  B.  Breser 40  4.000 

Jesse  Trome 320  6.400 

B.  F.  Lawson 80  7,000 

Wm.  C.  llyce 640  10,000 

D.Bruce 320  1.500 

E.  P.  Hughes 160  10,000 


289 


Names.                                                                                  No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

W.  F.  Kowe 7  $1,300 

George  Church 180  13,000 

S.W.Griffith 136  18,000 

E.J.Griffith 80  2,000 

T.  O.  Wilburn 80  4,800 

Jos.  Porteous 100  5,000 

A.  Pave 20  3.000 

W.Harvey 40  2,000 

W.  Harvey,  Agent  for  Perrin 3,600  36,000 

Tho  E.  Church 30  2,000 

G.  W.  G.  Glenn 40  9,000 

M.  Neiderer 20  3,000 

Stevens  Brothers 100  12,500 

H.  C.  Colwell 20  2,000 

B.Marks 700  60,000 

W.  J.  Prather 160  5,000 

Geo.  S.  McNeil 30  3,500 

S.A.Miller 30  4,500 

J.W.Williams 100  2,000 

Jas.  Carncross •. 40  8,000 

A.  B.  McCorkle 4  1,000 

M.T.Wilson 2  lots  200 

Robert  Smith 201  40,000 

Mrs.  Robert  Wright 320  7,000 

Mrs.  J.  Miller 160  3,000 

Robert  Barton 640  50O,0CO 

C.S.Pierce 10  1,500 

Wm.  Sutherland 80  8.000 

John  Beard 343  7,000 

R.  A.  White 20  4,C00 

M.  Ocbiuer '       80  7,500 

McConnell  &  Co 420  14,000 

Wm.  Sutton 20  1,500 

J.P.Vincent 280  32,000 

A.  S.  Bamfield 480  9,000 

A.S.Goldstein 20  800 

M.F.&S.Co 5,000  25,000 

H.Hedinger 82  2,500 

J.W.Conner , 20  1,200 

JohnWallder 20  2,000 

B.B.Pierce 20  3,000 

C.W.Howard 20  3,000 

W.B.Moore , 20  4.00O 

M.  Z.  Donahoe 500  50,000 

L.Anderson 480  7,800 


290 


Names.                                                                                   No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

K.M.Wilson 60  $6,000 

M.  Madsden 400  *       7,000 

C.  J.  Christiansen 20  2,500 

Wm.  M.  Hughes 320  50,000 

M.L.Smith 160  1,500 

W.  H.  McKune 640  4,000 

A.M.Clark 640  7,500 

J.S.Eastwood 40  2,0U0 

Packard  Bros 20  3,000 

Moses  Dodge 20  1,200 

L.  P.  Hogue 240  6,000 

G.  Eisen 640  25,000 

F.  Koedling 3,200  100,000 

D.  Duquesne 2  2,000 

S.H.Hill 320  4,000 

J.  J.  Beyburn 640  8,0CO 

A.  Loveall 163  2,500 

B.T.Elmore 400  7,000 

S.H.Cole 200  8,000 

D.  R.  Thayer 40  4,000 

J.F.  Morga 640  4,500 

J.  W.  Reese 90  16,000 

J  A.  Lindsey 30  1,800 

W.A.Linforth 50  3,000 

C.Schmidt 40  8,000 

F.  A.  Woodworth 160  30,000 

Samuel  Johnson ' 40  1,600 

J.  E.  Hughes 480  35,000 

Thos.  E.  Hughes 560  75,000 

F.  Jansen 80  800 

J.F.Simpson 20  4,000 

Wm.  Hamilton 404  3,000 

Wm.  &  Anna  Hawkins 640  10,500 

P.  A.  Burnette ...  200  3  000 

J.Harmon 160  3.000 

L.B.  Church 320  32,000 

M.  H.  Briley 40  8,000 

P.  Johansen 40  8,000 

E.  B.  Perrin 40,000  400,000 

G.W.Owen 640  12,000 

P.M.Corfley 160  10,000 

J.  B.  Hancock 160  4,800 

B.L.Dickson 40  4,500 

W.S.Graves 500  30,000 

C.  B.  Pressley  and  H.  S.  Dixon 100  12,000 


291 


Names.                                                                                    No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation^ 

T.  L.  Eeel 1,000  $20,000 

L  L.  Dixon Town  Lots.        1,500 

M.  R.  Medary "         ••  4,000 

L.Shaw •  •'        '«  3,000 

Rnl;ner,  Goldstein  &  Co 640  10,000 

Lewis  &  Bard 360  25,000 

J.T.Goodman 130  30,000 

J.  M.  Meiskell 

Phillips  Bros 240  9,600 

J.  W.  Gerrhart Town  lots.  500 

Lewis  Waggoner 480  10,000 

W.  H.  Jackson ...    

C.  T.  Riggs. 807  16,000 

E.M.Morgan 602  12,000 

J.H.Brady 200  20,000 

J.  A.  Blasingame 10,000  100,000 

B.  R.  Woodworth 240  30,000 

E.  A.  Baird 240  6,500 

J.  A.  Ewing 390  15.600 

Geo.  E.  Freeman 40  4,000 

J.  E.  Dickensen 120  2,400 

C.L.Walter 240  1,200 

W.J.  Berry 760  11,400 

W.  D.  Eericke 180  10,000 

J.  W.  Furguson 160  4,800 

Iowa  and  California  Fruit  Co 320  25,000 

Rosendal  &  Walton .* 100  5,000 

F.H.Adams 160  12,000 

John  S.  Dore 20  S.OC'O 

M.W.Miller 160  10,000 

W.  E .  Gilmore Merchant. 

F.  K.  Prescott 20  4,000 

S.  C.  St.  John Merchant. 

J.  L.  Lewison  &  Co *• 

F.J.Davis 80  2.400 

Geo.  M.  Edmunds 100  2,000 

G.  J.  Markewitz Merchant. 

John  Acworth 80  2,600 

J.  G.  McCall 640  12,800 

M.  W.  Brelenberg 

W.H.Parker 650  19,500 

W.D.Hill 164  3,300 

R.B.Johnson 100  2,000 

Rennie&  Noble 220  6,60o 

A.F.Baker 160  2.400 


292 


Names.                                                                                     No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

J.  J.  Grenham 200  $2,000 

Thos  K.Brown 250  3,000 

Jas.  Roberts 180  2,000 

€.  G.Anderson 40  2,000 

James  W.  Smith 20  3,000 

J.  M  Sumner ^ 20  2,000 

E.  Kauntze 80  4,000 

M.  Sides 400  10,000 

A.Barieau 80  7,000 

M.  Martin 40  1,600 

F.  B.  DeWitt 160  6,000 

D.B.Stephens 160  0,000 

W.  H.  Deedrick 40  1,200 

T.J.Anderson 3  500 

J.  E.  Whitsen 160  10,000 

S.B.Shaw 160  5,000 

J  A.  Hodges 80  4,000 

W.A.Yost 23J  1.000 

Jas.  H.  Gay 160  5,000 

J.H.Payne 80  3.000 

D.  Gourguet 48  4,800 

E.P   Falconer 120  12,000 

W.  S.  Staley 80  12,000 

J.  M.  Eose 160  7,500 

F.Ross 40  2,000 

I.  VonGlasen 160  6,000 

J.H.Walker 320  6,000 

H.  R.  Beyman '    240  5,000 

A.H.Graves. 3  500 

D.  E.  McCloskey 40  2,000 

Oscar  Duuke 20  ],000 

W.  S.  VanEmon 160  5,000 

Wm.  Maze 160  5.000 

F.J.Otis 160  6,000 

F.B.Cody 160  4,000 

J.  A.  Stroud 1,400  28,000 

J.  E.  Yokum 80  2.500 

O.S.Davis 40  1,500 

H.I.  Fowler 160  4,000 

Jas.  Karnes 3.000  60,000 

I.T.Bell 40  1,500 

I.A.Rose.. 80  3,200 

F.  M.  Cox 80  2,800 

John  Meyer 95  3,500 

R.  W.  Goodell 160  3,000 


293 


Names.                               '                                                      No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

Hugh  Forsman 160  $3;000 

H.  N.  Cutler 80  3,200 

W.  D.  Lagrange 40  1,200 

M.  L.  Dean 320  9,000 

E.  H.  Tucker : 1,500  30,000 

A.  M.  Terny 160  6,000 

W.T.Martin 220  5,000 

M.  M.  Cooper 160  4,500 

F.A.Wood ' 80  2,000 

G.  A.  Walker 220  2,600 

John  Tuft 80  3,200 

Jas.  B.  Sheat 1,000  30,000 

C.  Baley * 240  7,000 

W.  W.  Baley 240  8  000 

D.  H  Cobb, 60  2,400 

W.J.Caldwell 160  10,000 

W.  T.  Cox 89  1,500 

W.  A.  Sanders 260  10,000 

Z.  T.  Jordan 160  1,000 

B.  N.  McCloskey 180  7,500 

B.  M.  Crow 40  1,600 

J.  W.  Whitsen.  S.  T.  Prather  &  Bro Town  lots 

Hy.  Hausberger 280  8,400 

K.G.Woods 160  6,000 

M.  Suyder 80  4,000 

T.J.Otis 160  6,000 

J.G.Dawes 960  4,800 

J.  A.  M.  Vanness. .' 40  400 

L.W.Spencer 240  2,400 

Theo.  Schilling 160  6,000 

C.  Schilling 320  10,000 

K.  E.  Spence 160  4,000 

Elisha  Harlan 160  1,600 

G.  W.  Mooney 160  10,000 

Jas.  H.  Powell 320  6,000 

J.  Schonwand 600  4,000 

Zumwalt  &  Baker 80  1,000 

K.R.Lee 40  700 

J.M.Smith 160  6,000 

J.  H^  Thrasher 40  1,000 

H.  P.  Cease 80  1,500 

Joaquin  F.  Prerro 80  2,000 

N.F.Martin 186  9,000 

Turner  Elder 160  4,000 

Drury  Elder .80  2,000 


294 


Names.                                                                                  No.  Acres  Owned.  Valuation. 

N.  C.  Carrington 160  $4,000 

W.  G.  Thasher 40  700 

J.  R.  Baird 160  5,000 

Jos.  Johnson 160  5,000 

O.  E.  Kinkerlin 160  3,000 

Wilson  P.  Mickel 100  2,000 

Freedom  Bennett 90  2,000 

L.  Cohen,  Merchant 

John  B.Kelso 20  8,000 

C.  H.  Eobinson 160  8,000 

J.  L.  Gilbert 320  $40  per  acre. 

E.  T.  Hammers 320*'  " 

W.  S.  McCartney 80   " 

W.  D.  Eead 160   " 

Eeadife  Dudley 152   "  '* 

E.Johnson 169.52  4,000 

A.  W.  Wibber  . . . ." 3,300  66,000 

Grand  total $5,042,000 


295 


The  undersigned,  o-wners  of  land  along  the  banks  of  Kings  Kiver,  respect- 
fully represent  to  yonr  honorable  body,  that  the  owners  of  the  bank  lands, 
otherwise  known  as  riparian  owners,  are  interested  in  irrigation  as  much  as 
others,  and  respectfully  pray  your  honorable  body  to  pass  Senate  Bills  210, 
37,  38,  39,  40  and  41. 

E.  D.  Morrison.  Susie  Sutherland, 

N.  J.  Layton,  Ellen  Wimmer, 

T.  Williams,      '  James  Sutherland, 

E.  T.  Kay,  C.  F.  Kiggs, 

J.  A.  Stroud,  R.  Wilson, 

T.  B.  Hays,  J.  F.  Brooks, 

S.  W.  Hays,  Joel  Lyall, 

Sam  Davis,  D.  Burris, 

Solomon  Davis,  John  E.  Palmer, 

M.  P.  Warner,  A.  T.  Yeargin, 

T.  S.  Beatty,  D.  J.  McConnell, 

E.  M.  Morgan,  D.  Wait, 

J.  M.  Bell,  A.  G.  Anderson, 

D.  K.  Zumwalt,  E.  C.  Thorn, 

W.  T.  Martin,  W.  McHaley, 

A.  Farley,  S.  M.  Phillips, 
Lewis  Waggoner,  Eobert  Stevenson, 

'  Mr.  F.  Sutherland,       S.  Traukenan, 

.     T.  P.  Sutherland,         D.  P.  Blivins, 
Edward  Sutherland,     N.  Phillips,  Jr., 
Gillis  Sutherland,        M.  C.  Hoag, 
Delos  Swain, 
Elisha  Harlan,        900  acres,  value  $10,000. 

B.  H.  Burritt,         240     "  *'  4,000. 
James  H.  Banelle,  320     "          '•  6,000. 


296 


We,  the  People  of  Merced  County  in  Mass  Meeting,  on  Monday,  February 
22d,  1885,  ask  and  demand  of  our  Senators  and  Assemblymen,  and  of  the 
present  Legislature,  to  pass  Senate  Bill  No.  210,  and  Assembly  Bill  No.  410. 


H.  H.  McCloskey 
J.  W.  Robertson, 
John  Grebe, 
M.  B,  Cusick, 
E.  S  O'Brien, 
C.  C.  Mitchell, 
Eobert  N.  Hughes, 
H.  M.  Bucket, 
Wm.  W.  Gray, 
J.  W.  Blackburn, 
C.  C.  Smith, 
Thos.  S.  Peck, 
P.  A.  Spooner, 
Geo.  Renter, 
H.  W.  French, 
J.  F.  McSwain, 
W.  H.  Mitchell, 
J.  L.  Deford, 
C.  J.  Ehat. 
T.  E.  Flournoy, 
Wm.  Twomey, 
Wm,  Fahey, 
W.  E.  Season. 


Lucien  Curtis. 
W.  Fahey, 
Geo.  P.  Lee. 
J.  C.  Bannister, 
A.  A.  Eleat, 
J.  M.  Hollister, 
Thos.  Harris, 
A.  H.  Dauchy, 
Wm.  Wegner, 
John  Morley, 
H.  W.  Leeker, 
Geo.  Ponway, 
W.  L.  Ashe, 
Sam'l  C.  Bates, 
A.  J.  Meauy, 
.  Smith, 
W.  W.  Abbott, 
J.  L.  Melner, 
A.  Beeds, 
O.  M.  Stoddard, 
C.  H.  Marks, 
John  Crosby, 


297 


PETITION  FROM  KERN  COUNTY. 


To  the  Honorable  the  Senate  and  Assembly 

of  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  California: 

The  undersigned  citizens  and  tax  payers,  residents  of  Kern  County,  State 
of  California,  most  respectfully  represent  that  the  very  life  and  prosperity  of 
that  portion  of  the  San  Joaquin  valley,  situate  in  this  County,  depends  upon, 
the  right  of  appropriation  of  water  from  running  streams  for  irrigation  pur- 
poses; and  in  view  of  a  recent  decision  of  our  Supreme  Court,  enunciating 
the  doctrine,  "that  the  waters  of  streams  must  run  in  their  accustomed 
channels  undiminished  in  quality,"  we  do  most  earnestly  petition  your 
Honorable  body  to  enact  a  law  recognizing  and  establishing  the  right  of 
appropriation  of  the  waters  of  the  streams  in  this  valley  for  the  purposes  of 
irrigation.  Our  property,  our  homes,  our  very  existence  as  a  community,  de- 
pends upon  immediate  legislation  in  our  behalf,  for  which  we  will  ever  pray, 
etc.  , 

Kern  County  Bank,  by  S.  Jewett,  President. 

H.  A.  Blodgett,  Director  Kern  Valley  Bank. 

Sol.  Jewett,  "  "  " 

A.  Weill,  *' 

A.  F.  Bernard,  Treasurer  Kern  Co. 

W.  Tyler,  Auditor, 

N.  K.  Packard,  County  Clerk. 

D.  A.  Sinclair,  Deputy  Sheriff. 

Board  of  Supervisors,  by  the  Chairman,  J:  M.  McKamy. 

A.  Weill,  merchant  and  land  owner. 

Phil.  Jewett,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

Sol.  Jewett, 

C.  W.  Goodrich,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

A.  Heyman,  merchant. 

E.  A.  Dumble,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

F.  M.  Carlock,  land  owner. 
O.  D.  Fish,  merchant. 

Paul  Galtes,  merchant  and  land  owner. 
H.  D.  Bargwardt,  land  owner  and  butcher. 
Thomas  Owens,  land  owner. 
John  O' Miller,  " 

B.  F.  Rector,  land  owner  and  stock  raiser. 
S.  M.  Judd,  land  owner  and  farmer. 

Hirshfeld  Bros.  &  Co.,  merchants,  property  and  land  owners. 


298 


L.  Hirshfeld,  merchant  and  property  owner. 
Daniel  Wagoner,  farmer  and  land  owner. 
W.  R.  MacMurdo,  Connty  Surveyor. 

0.  O.  Mattson,  real  estate  owner. 

Ed.  A.  Pueschell,  owner  of  160  acres  of  land. 

R.  Hudnut,  land  and  property  owner. 

M.  C.  Purcell,  land  owner. 

Dom  Castro,  •' 

Tomas  Castro,         " 

H.  F.  Condict,         " 

Mrs.  J.  D.  Thronsen,  land  owner. 

H.  C.  Park,  lumber  dealer  and  real  estate  owner. 

Alonzo  Coons,  agent  Wells,  Fargo  &  Co.  and  merchant. 

A.  P.  Eyrand,  hotel  keeper. 

L.  S.  Rogers,  land  owner  and  physician. 

D.  S.  Loomis,  land  owner  and  stock  raiser. 

H.  H.  Fish,  real  estate  owner  and  stable  keeper. 

H.  H.  Colton,  Canal  Superintendent. 

S.  H.  Anderson,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

A.  G.  Meyers,  land  owner. 

W.  A.  Howell,  real  estate  owner. 

J.  J.  Darmul,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

W.  T.  Jameson,  land  owner. 

W.  D.  Hall,  land  owner. 

John  E.  Bailey,  property  and  land  owner. 

C.  Brower,  land  and  property  owner. 

W.  R.  Bowen,  Sheriff  Kern  County. 

1.  L.  Miller,  hotel  keeper. 

T.  E.  Harding,  Assesor  Kern  County. 

C.  H.  Swain,  land  owner. 

D.  A.  Leonard,  land  owner. 

H,  A.  Blodgett.  land  owner  and  bank  cashier. 

Chas.  E.  Jewett,  stock  raiser. 

F.  D.  Nelson,  land  owner. 

W.  H.  Scribner,  property  owner  and  merchant. 

J.  E.  Smith,  blacksmith  and  property  owner. 

B.  Brundage,  land  owner  and  farmer. 

A.  C.  Mande,  publisher  Californian  and  land  owner. 

J.  \V.  Freeman,  District  Attorney,  Kern  Co. 

Thos.  C.  Miller,  land  owner. 

Thos.  J.  Davis,  land  owner. 

John  F.  Maio,  druggist  and  property  owner. 

L.  A.  Beardsley,  land  owner  and  farmer. 

E.  P.  Davis,  livery  stable  keeper. 
Walter  Bull,  property  owner. 


299 


N.  E.  Wilkenson,  J.  P.  and  property  owner. 

M.  "W.  Morris,  land  owner. 

Wm.  F.  Nelson,  land  owner. 

R.  M.  Payson,  stock  raiser  and  ag^nt  of  Gen.  E.  P.  Beale. 

Franz  Buckrens,  property  owner. 

O.  Brown,  property  owner. 

C.  H.  Duvall,  real  estate  owner. 
Henry  Bauer,  land  owner. 
Mrs.  Barbry,  St.  Merr}',  farmer. 
E.  M.  Ashe,  land  owner. 

John  M.  Keith,  stock  raiser  and  land  owner. 

G.  W.  Morrill,  tax  payer. 

Chas.  Baterbaiigh,  tax  payer. 

Gao.  G.  Doherty,  tax  payer  and  land  owner. 

W.  P.  McCord,  stock  raiser  and  land  owner. 

Alexander  Hudnut,  taxpayer. 

E.  M.  Roberts,  land  owner  and  stock  raiser. 

E.  F.  Gitel,  hotel  keeper. 

Ed.  O'Donnell,  real  estate  owner. 

J.  Enas,  farmer  and  land  owner. 

O.  M.  Taylor,  land  owner. 

D.  G.  McLean,  land  owner  and  farmer. 
D.  Hill,  land  owner. 

Dallas  McCord,  butcher  and  land  owner. 

Those  signers  represent  on  the  assessment  roll  property  to  the  amount  of  $470,000. 
Copy  of  memorial  introduced  in  Senite  by  Senator  Reddy  from  the  people  of  Eern 
County,  praying  for  the  passage  of  irrigation  laws. 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 
or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
BIdg.  400,  Richnnond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 
2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 

(415)642-6233 
1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books 

to  NRLF 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days 

prior  to  due  date 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


JAN  2  5 1988 
OCT  21 1991 


I 


YC  53784 


j-r,  379962 

t  z  C- 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CAUFORNIA  LIBRARY 


